:t^;X^^-- 


EUROPE 


1789-1920 


BY 
EDWARD  RAYMOND  TURNER,  Ph.D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  EUROPEAN  HISTORY 
IN  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  MICHIGAN 


{ 


GARDEN   CITY  NEW   YORK 

DOUBLEDAY,   PAGE   &   COMPANY 
1920 


rs 


DOUBLEDAT,  PAGE  &  COMPANY 

ALL  RIGHTS   RESEBVED,  INCLUDING  THAT  OF 

TRANSLATION  INTO  FOREIGN  LANGUAGES, 

INCLUDINQ  THE  SCANDINAVIAN 


HISTORIf  I 


TO 
MY   COUSIN 

KATHLEEN  JANET  RIORDAN 

COMPANION,  PATRONESS,  FRIEND 
IN   MEMORIAM 

MCMXX 


^47251, 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arcinive 

in  2008  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.arcliive.org/details/europe1789192000turnrich 


PREFACE 

The  author  has  attempted  to  write  an  account  of  Eu- 
rope since  the  French  Revolution.  The  past  few  years 
have  added  much  and  brought  considerable  alteration  in 
perspective. 

To  people  now  living  the  epoch  since  1789  is  the  most 
important  and  interesting  in  the  history  of  mankind.  It 
began  with  a  revolution  whose  effects  are  not  yet  all 
measured;  it  ended  with  another  whose  consequences  can 
scarcely  yet  even  be  guessed  at.  It  was  ushered  in  and 
completed  by  devastating  wars  which  altered  and  may 
alter  Europe  for  many  generations.  It  was  a  period  of 
mournful  failures  and  mistakes,  but  it  witnessed  more 
progress  than  any  epoch  preceding.  It  was  a  period  when 
for  the  first  time  the  mass  of  the  people  got  education, 
and  some  political  power — which  still  they  are  learning  to 
use.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  period,  amidst  the  infinite 
complexity  of  modern  life,  there  was  slowly  unfolded  a 
mighty  sequence  of  things,  ever  more  ominous  and  dread- 
ful, like  the  prologue  to  some  ancient  tragedy,  or  music 
which  forebodes  doom  approaching,  until  at  last  a  catas- 
trophe came  which  threatened  to  engulf  civilization.  As 
this  book  begins  at  the  end  of  an  old  era,  so  it  concludes 
with  the  ending  of  an  era  which  already  begins  to 
seem  old. 

The  work  has  been  partly  a  labor  of  love,  based  on 
studies  undertaken  for  their  own  sake,  then  elaborated 
in  the  teaching  of  some  years.  My  obligations  to  others 
are  numerous  and  very  great;  but  not  a  few  of  the  con- 
clusions are  based  upon  study  and  observation  in  Europe. 


viii  PREFACE 

The  bibliographies  have  been  reduced  from  twice  their 
present  size,  and  in  earlier  version  the  text  was  a  third 
longer  than  now.  It  seemed  all-important,  even  at  the 
cost  of  omissions,  to  make  a  text  brief  enough  not  to  inter- 
fere with  additional  reading  in  the  sources  and  best  ac- 
counts of  the  masters.  It  is  better  for  the  student  also 
to  have  examined  some  of  the  constitutions  and  state 
papers,  some  of  the  great  biographies,  and  some  books 
like  the  Reminiscences  of  Bismarck,  than  merely  to  have 
studied  a  text  in  which  all  the  important  information  is 
assembled. 

The  author  is  indebted  to  Professor  W.  A.  Frayer,  of 
the  University  of  Michigan  for  reading  critically  all  of 
the  manuscript,  and  generously  giving  assistance  and 
suggestions. 

Edward  Raymond  Turner. 
Ann  Arbor,  Michigan, 
August  1,  1920. 


CONTENTS 
PART  I 

1789-1871 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.    The  Old  Europe 3 

II.    Separation    of    the    Communities    in 

America 22 

III.  The  French  Revolution 40 

IV.  Napoleon 67 

^^Cy    The  Congress  of  Vienna  and  the  Con- 
^^^        CERT  OF  Europe 93 

VJVJ/    The  Industrial  Revolution  ....  109 

^    VII.     The  United  Kingdom,  1789-1832.      .      .  146 

VIII.    The  United  Kingdom,  1832-1867.      .      .  168 

CT^  France  Before  1870 188 

X.    Austria,  the  Germanies,  and  the  Rise 
OF  Prussia 212 

^^l)  Italy 249 

^11.     RussLV,  1789-1881 265  *^ 

XIII.    The  Lesser  Peoples 291 

PART   II 

1871-1920 

CHAPTEB  PAGE 

I.    The  Military   Triumphs   of  Germany,  y 

1864-1871 313 

II.    The  Growth  of  the  New  German  Empire    329^ 


J 


X  CONTENTS— Con/inwed( 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

III.  The    Leadership    of    Germany  —  The 

Triple  Alliance 352 

IV.  The  Recovery  of  France — The  Dual 

Alliance 377 

Democratic  Britain 400 

Russia 419 

Austria,  Turkey,  the  Balkans  .      .      .  439 

Colonies  and  Imperial  Expansion  .      .  473        I 

Triple  Alliance  and  the  Ententes     .  494 

The  Causes  of  the  Great  War.     .     .  513 

The  Great  War .534 

The  Settlement  of  1920 576 

The  Russian  Revolution 600  -/  I 

European  Civilization  Since  the  French 

Revolution 608 

XV.    Social  and  Intellectual  Changes  .      .  63^ 

Appendix  ..........  653 

Index 663 


MAPS  . 

no.  PAGE 

1.  Europe  in  1789  (In  colors)    .      .      .  Following  4 

2.  Relief  Map  of  Europe  ....         "  20 

3.  Europe  in  1810 "  68 

4.  Europe  in  1815 "  100 

5.  The   Coal,   Iron,   and  Oil  Resources   of 

Europe Following  116 

6.  Africa  in  1800 "  164 

7.  AsL^.iNl800 "  180 

8.  The  Germanic  Confederation      .         "  212 

9.  Racial  Map  of  Austria-Hungary       .      .     .221 

10.  Prussl^  in  1815 239 

11.  Italy  in  1815 253 

12.  Map  to  Illustrate  the  History  of  Poland  271 

13.  The  Russian  Empire  in  1914     .      .  Following  276 

14.  Ethnographic  Map  of  Europe      .         "  292 

15.  Europe  in  1871 "  324 

16.  Alsace-Lorraine ,      .      .  327 

17.  The  British  Empire  in  1914     .      .  Followi?i^  404 

18.  Racial  Map  of  Russia 423 

19.  The  Treaty  of  San  Stefano 453 

20.  The  Balkans  in  1878 454 

21.  The  Balkans  in  1913 461 

22.  Asia  in  1914 Following  484 

23.  Africa  in  1914 "  500 

24.  Supposed  Pan-German  Plan    .      .         "  532 

25.  Thij  Western  Front  in  the  Great  War       .  546 

26.  The  Eastern  Front  in  the  Great  War        .  547 

27.  Africa  IN  1920 Following  580 


xii  MAPS 

MO.  PAOB 

28.  Czecho-Slovaeia 589 

29.  The  Balkans  in  1920 591 

80.  Jugo-Slavia 595 

81.  The  British  Empire  est  1920     .      .  Following  596 

82.  Europe  in  1920  (In  colors)    ..."  644 


PART  I 

1789-1870 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Absence  of 
things    com- 
mon now 


Life  in  the 

country 


reared  their  children;  and  the  principal  occupation  of 
most  people  was  making  their  living,  getting  food  and 
clothing  and  shelter.  But  a  great  many  things,  important 
and  necessary  now,  and  taken  as  a  matter  of  course,  had 
not  been  then  brought  to  pass.  There  were  no  railroads, 
no  steamboats,  iio  tclephojnes.or  telegraphs,  no  electric 
cars  or  lights,'  no  moving  pictures,  and,  except  in  England 
where  the  ^Indilstrial  Keyoiu.tion  had  recently  begun,  no 
great  mechanical  appliances  and  no  factories  filled  with 
machinery  working  for  men.  Newspapers  were  few  and 
small  and  had  small  circulation.  A  great  many  books  and 
pamphlets  were  published,  but  most  men  and  women  were 
not  able  either  to  read  or  to  write.  There  were  no  systems 
of  education  for  all  the  people,  in  what  we  call  public  schools 
nowadays.  Compared  with  the  times  in  which  we  live, 
life  in  those  days  was  for  most  people  simple  and  homely, 
bare,  lowly,  and  coarse.  In  many  respects  conditions  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  were  more 
like  what  they  had  been  a  hundred,  or  even  a  thousand, 
years  before,  than  they  were  like  those  of  the  present. 
Europe  about  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century,  like 
all  parts  of  the  civilized  world  down  to  that  time,  was 
predominantly  agricultural.  The  majority  of  the  inhab- 
itants were  grouped  in  small  villages  set  in  the  midst  of 
plowland,  meadow,  grazing  land,  and  wood.  As  is  still 
so  in  less  favored  countries,  the  houses  were  lowly  and 
small,  with  poor  furniture  and  simple  utensils.  There 
were  not  many  windows  to  give  light  by  day,  and  after 
dark  the  inmates  went  to  bed,  for  there  was  no  gas,  no 
electric  bulb,  oil  was  expensive,  and  often  candles  cost 
more  than  people  could  spend.  The  cots  or  the  hovels  of 
imnumbered  peasants  were  dirty,  and  damp,  and  dark. 
The  joyous  seasons  were  spring  and  summer  and  early 
autumn,  in  a  way  not  known  to  some  of  us  now,  for  the 
warmth  of  the  sun  gave  almost  all  the  heating  which 
the  mass  of  the  people  could  get.     In  winter  there  were 


f 


1.    EURO 


IN  1789 


THE  OLD  EUROPE 


only  a  few  in  Europe  who  could  have  coal,  and  only  a  small 
number  of  the  well-to-do  who  had  fire-wood  in  ample 
supply.  There  was  more  joy  in  out-of-doors  then  than 
now.  But  work  in  the  fields  or  on  the  wastes,  in  the  past- 
ure or  in  the  woods,  was  hard  and  the  hours  were  long. 
Farming  was  rude  and  implements  poor;  crops  were  gen- 
erally not  bountiful,  or,  if  they  were,  a  great  part  of  them 
went  to  pay  rent  to  the  owner  or  the  lord,  and  tithe  to  the 
Church.  The  center  of  life  for  the  neighborhood  was  the 
parish  church  in  a  manner  scarcely  to  be  conceived  of  now, 
for  then  the  church  was  the  holy  place  of  the  community, 
in  which  people  were  baptized,  married,  and  taught 
by  the  priest,  and  which  received  them  at  last  in  its  con- 
secrated ground.  It  was  also  the  social  center  of  the 
neighborhood  doing  for  people  in  some  fashion  what  is 
now  got  from  moving  pictures  or  in  theaters  and  schools. 
And  often  near  by,  hated  or  revered,  was  the  fine  dwelling 
of  some  great  man,  the  manor-house  of  a  lord,  or  even  the 
castle  of  some  proud  noble.  In  them  went  on  a  life  very 
different,  but  most  of  the  people  never  saw  it;  and  the  tales 
of  it  were  almost  as  remote  to  them  as  accounts  of  fairies 
or  some  faraway  land. 

Lowly  as  was  the  condition  of  these  people,  in  many 
parts  of  Europe  it  was  better  than  it  had  been  in  earlier 
days.  In  antiquity  a  great  number  of  the  people  were 
slaves,  entirely  unfree,  often  bought  and  sold  exactly  like 
chattels  or  things.  It  was  a  great  advance  upon  this  when 
in  the  later  days  of  the  Roman  Empire,  partly  because  of 
economic  changes  and  partly  through  the  influence  of 
Christianity,  slavery  began  to  disappear  and  the  great 
mass  of  the  people  after  a  while  were  in  the  higher  condi- 
tion of  serfdom.  As  serfs  men  and  women  were  free  in 
their  personal  relations,  not  to  be  bought  and  sold  like 
chattel  property;  but  none  the  less  they  were  partly  un- 
free, since  they  were  bound  to  remain  in  the  place  of  their 
birth,  and  were  under  obligation  to  give  the  lord  of  their 


The     village 
church 


Serfdom 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Decline  of 
serfdom 


The  rural 
population 


Slowness 
change 


of 


land  part  of  what  they  raised  and  to  work  for  him  many 
of  the  days  of  the  year.  Then,  like  slavery  before  it, 
serfdom  began  to  pass  slowly  away,  due  chiefly  to  the 
working  of  economic  causes  which  made  it  more  profitable 
for  the  lord  to  give  wages  than  the  use  of  his  land,  and 
collect  rent  rather  than  take  a  share  or  labor  from  his 
people.  The  disappearance  of  serfdom  was  a  slow  process. 
In  England  it  had  disappeared  by  the  beginning  of  the 
seventeenth  century;  in  Scotland  there  were  traces  of  it 
until  near  the  end  of  the  eighteenth.  By  that  time  in 
some  parts  of  the  continent  it  was  completely  gone,  but 
there  were  still  thousands  of  serfs  in  France,  while  to  the 
east  in  the  German  lands  there  were  many  more,  and  in 
Poland  and  Russia  the  great  bulk  of  the  population  re- 
mained partly  unfree.  It  was  the  results  of  the  French 
Revolution,  and  the  power  of  Napoleon,  soon  to  come, 
which  would  abolish  serfdom  in  central  Europe,  while  in 
Russia  it  would  linger  on  until  1861,  about  the  very  time 
when  negro  slavery  was  brought  to  an  end  in  the  southern 
part  of  the  United  States.  So  recent  is  the  civil  freedom 
of  a  great  part  of  the  population  of  the  world. 

We  have  no  reliable  statistics  before  the  nineteenth 
century,  but  it  is  probable  that  nine  tenths  of  the  people 
lived  their  lives  in  the  small  agricultural  communities, 
though  in  England  and  parts  of  western  Europe  the  pro- 
portion was  less.  Simple,  lowly,  ignorant  folk  they  were, 
unlettered,  narrow,  oftentimes  incredibly  superstitious  and 
dependent  upon  their  parson  or  priest,  filled  with  prejudice 
against  outsiders,  for  traveling  was  difficult  and  most 
people  seldom  went  far  from  their  homes.  These  people 
had  no  part  in  the  governing  of  their  countries,  except 
sometimes  in  the  management  of  their  humblest  local 
affairs.  History  tells  little  about  them.  Governments 
heeded  them  scantily,  except  to  take  from  them  taxes  and 
labor.  Seldom  did  they  rebel  or  stir  against  their  masters. 
The  peasants  of  Gaul  gave  trouble  in  the  later  centuries  of 


THE  OLD  EUROPE  7 

the  Roman  Empire;  the  Jacquerie  rose  agamst  their  lords 
in  France  during  the  Hundred  Years'  War;  there  was  a 
memorable  Peasant  Revolt  in  England  in  1381;  and  a  more 
memorable  rising  of  German  peasants  in  1525.  These 
movements  and  a  few  others  were  always  crushed  merci- 
lessly by  the  upper  classes,  and  came  to  nothing.  The 
day  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people,  of  the  rights  of  man, 
had  not  come  yet.  In  countless  villages  men  and  women 
lived  little  lives,  with  rude  plenty  at  best,  generally  in 
meager  existence,  often  in  grinding  poverty  and  toil. 
They  lived  and  died  and  passed  from  recollection;  and 
that  is  all,  except  that  throughout  this  time  they  were 
most  of  the  people  of  Europe,  and  made  the  nations  ruled 
by  great  kings  and  led  by  commanders. 

History  has  almost    nothing  to  say  about  women. —    Position  of 
beyond  the  fact  that  they  were  the  fundamental  part  of    ^^men 
society.   (Through  long  generations  they  had  been  the  | 

mothers  of  the  human  race^  and  made  the  homes  of  the  S>vA^^^^ ' 
men  and  the  children.     They  did  a  large  part  of  all  the 
work  and  much  of  the  most  useful  work.     Almost  always 
their   condition  was  lower  and  worse  than   the  men's. 
There  had  been  empresses  and  queens,  sometimes,  and  very 
few  rulers  in  Europe  had  been  greater  than  Elizabeth  of 
England  or  Catherine   of  Russia.     But   almost   always 
women  were  strictly  subordinate  to  men — to  their  fathers     Subordina- 
before  they  were  married,  afterward  to  their  husbands.     tio°  of 
For  them  there  was  practically  no  calling  but  marriage,    ^^^^^"^ 
and  the  law  generally  considered  them  to  be  part  of  their 
husbands,   not   persons    or    individuals,  after    marriage. 
They  owed  obedience  to  their  husbands,  who  were  respon- 
sible for  them  under  the  law.     Most  women,  perhaps 
were  treated  well,  as  things  then  were,  but  many  were  sub- 
jected, without  hope  of  relief,  to  petty  tyrants  in  their 
homes.     It  was  a  man's  world  much  more  than  it  is  now. 

Above  the  masses  of  the  people  was  a  much  smaller    The 
class  which  had  arisen  in  the  towns,  the  boroughs  or  burgs,    ^°"''^®o'*'® 


8 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Future 
importance 


Cities 


called  in  France  the  bourgeoisie^  which  would  now  be 
better  known  as  the  middle  class.  It  had  been  rising  and 
increasing  in  numbers  and  power  for  some  hundreds  of 
years,  as  towns  and  cities  developed  and  as  commerce  and 
industry  increased.  It  was  made  up  of  the  lawyers,  the 
masters  of  the  small  industries  which  then  existed,  the 
merchants,  and  the  traders.  To  a  considerable  extent  it 
contained  within  its  numbers  the  ablest  and  most  pro- 
gressive men,  and  some  of  the  wealthiest  and  most  sub- 
stantial. They  had  much  influence  in  the  Germanics  and 
in  France,  as  once  they  had  had  in  the  Italian  states;  they 
had  considerable  part  in  the  government  of  Great  Britain, 
and  were  of  large  consequence  in  the  Netherlands;  but 
generally  their  influence  was  indirect  and  their  power 
small,  for  they  were  looked  down  upon  by  the  aristocracy, 
and  debarred  from  the  privileges  and  opportunities  which 
were  open  to  nobles  and  great  men  of  the  Church.  After 
all,  they  represented  the  power  of  the  cities  and  of  indus- 
trial life,  and  most  of  Europe  was  still  rural.  Nevertheless 
the  future  was  with  these  bourgeois.  It  was  they  who 
would  guide  the  French  Revolution  and  make  the  enduring 
changes  of  the  Revolutionary  period.  They  were  to  rise 
greater  and  greater  as  the  Industrial  Revolution  slowly 
spread  over  Europe  in  the  nineteenth  century.  Then 
political  power,  management  of  government,  and  greatest 
place  in  the  state  were  all  to  be  taken  by  this  middle  class, 
which  in  many  respects  would  be  the  upper  class,  as  nobles 
and  princes  were  thrust  into  the  background  and  deprived 
of  old  privilege  and  power.  It  would  be  the  bourgeois 
whom  socialists  and  others  would  regard  as  their  worst 
opponents;  and  in  the  twentieth  century,  the  middle  class 
would  be  assailed  by  the  Bolshevilci  as  arch-enemies  to 
be  overthrown  in  raising  up  the  proletariat,  or  mass  of  the 
people. 

Although  most  of  the  people  of  Europe  lived  in  villages 
in  the  country,  there  were  towns  and  some  cities  great 


« 


THE  OLD  EUROPE  9 

and  important.  London  had  more  than  a  million  inhab- 
itants, and  Paris  more  than  half  a  million.  Amsterdam 
and  other  Dutch  cities  were  mighty  hives  of  industry  and 
commerce.  The  Spanish  cities  were  now  slumbering  in 
decay,  and  the  places  once  renowned  in  the  Spanish  or 
Austrian  Netherlands  were  enveloped  in  the  hush  and  the 
quiet  which  come  when  progress  and  activity  cease.  So 
it  was  with  the  Italian  cities,  great  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
and  the  very  cradles  of  the  Renaissance :  Venice  was  dying 
in  the  midst  of  that  charm  which  travellers  still  love  to 
see;  and  Genoa,  Milan,  and  Rome  were  all  greater  in  the 
memory  of  what  they  had  been  than  for  what  they  con- 
tinued to  be.  The  seaports  of  the  German  states,  Ham- 
burg, Lubeck,  Bremen,  and  the  others,  thriving  in  the 
days  of  the  glory  of  the  Hanseatic  League,  were  sunk  now 
in  the  silence  and  decay  which  would  last  until  the  revival 
and  unification  of  the  Germanics  awoke  them  once  more. 
Vienna  was  the  old,  proud  capital  of  the  German  countries. 
Far  to  the  southeast  on  the  Bosporus  Constantinople  con- 
tinued to  be  magnificent  under  the  Turks.  And  in  the 
distant  eastern  parts,  little  known  to  most  of  Europe,  were 
holy  Moscow  and  the  new  capital,  St.  Petersburg,  which 
had  only  been  founded  in  1703. 

In  the  cities  the  principal  occupations  were  manufac-  Urban  life 
turing  and  especially  trade,  for  the  greatest  of  all  of  them 
had  grown  mostly  because  of  their  commerce.  Since  there 
were  no  railroads  yet,  and  not  many  canals,  and  since  roads 
were  poor,  the  most  important  communications  were  by 
water,  and  the  greatest  cities  were  by  the  sea,  like  Amster- 
dam and  London  and  Marseilles,  or  on  some  river,  like 
Paris,  Nijni  Novgorod,  and  Vienna.  The  manufacturing 
was  then,  for  the  most  part,  as  the  name  implies,  done  by 
hand;  and  while  by  this  time  in  the  great  towns  of  western 
Europe  much  of  it  was  carried  on  in  factories,  a  great  deal 
more  was  still  done  according  to  the  domestic  system,  in 
the  homes  of  the  workers  themselves.     Some  of  these  cities 


10 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Importance 
of  some 
cities 


The 
nobility 


High  posi- 
tion 


were  important  out  of  all  proportion  to  their  population, 
for  they  were  the  centers  of  financial  power,  of  intellectual 
activity  and  progress,  and  often  the  seat  of  the  government 
of  the  nation.  By  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  Paris 
was  the  very  heart  and  center  of  France,  and  in  England 
the  course  of  London  could  usually  be  decisive.  The 
English  Civil  Wars  of  the  seventeenth  century  were  de- 
cided against  the  king  largely  because  parliament  was  sup- 
ported by  London;  in  1789  the  French  Revolution  was 
made  possible  and  begun  by  the  citizens  of  Paris. 

The  greatness  of  the  middle  class  and  the  effects  of  the 
Industrial  Revolution  were  for  the  future,  and  still  most 
of  the  power  and  wealth  in  Europe  was  in  the  hands  of  an 
aristocracy  which  made  the  smallest  and  highest  class. 
Long  before,  when  the  central  authority  of  the  Roman 
Empire  broke  up  and  Europe  was  scourged  by  barbarian 
invaders — Germans,  Northmen,  Hungarians — everywhere 
fortresses  were  built  by  strong  and  able  men,  who  governed 
their  districts,  protected  the  inhabitants,  lorded  it  over 
them,  and  exacted  obedience  and  service  from  them.  In 
the  early  Middle  Ages  the  best  of  these  feudal  lords  had 
saved  such  civilization  as  remained.  But  in  course  of 
time  they  were  an  encumbrance  rather  than  a  benefit 
wherever  they  were,  and  often  the  best  hope  of  further 
progress  lay  in  their  being  overthrown.  To  a  considerable 
extent  they  had  already  been  shorn  of  their  political  power 
in  the  progressive  places,  though  in  Poland  their  im- 
portance and  ancient  power  remained  nearly  unabated. 
Everywhere  they  continued  to  have  the  social  and  eco- 
nomic advantages  possessed  in  earlier  times.  In  England, 
in  France,  in  the  German  countries,  in  Russia,  great  lords 
and  great  ecclesiastics  constituted  a  caste  apart.  For 
them  oftentimes  were  reserved  the  important  offices  of 
state;  frequently  they  directed  the  councils  of  the  nation; 
everywhere,  except  in  Switzerland  and  Holland,  they  held 
a  great  part  of  all  of  the  land  and  the  wealth;  they  were 


THE  OLD  EUROPE  11 

generally  exempt  from  heavy  taxation;  their  blood  was 
deemed  better  than  that  of  the  commoner;  and  usually 
no  person  outside  the  noble  class  could  aspire  to  marry 
within  it.  An  immeasurable  gulf  divided  the  members 
of  this  noble  aristocracy  from  all  the  other  classes  beneath 
them;  and  even  in  England,  where  the  division  was  not  so 
deep,  the  distance  was  still  very  great.  In  Europe  of  this 
old  regime  the  nobles,  whether  great  lords  or  petty  knights 
of  the  Empire,  were  the  splendid  top  of  a  society  which 
rested  upon  the  toil  and  the  support  of  the  immense  multi- 
tude of  the  people. 

But  while  they  kept  their  wealth  and  their  privileges,  in  Kings 
many  lands  now  their  independent  political  power  was 
gone.  Once  they  had  ruled  without  interference  from  a 
higher  authority,  and  still  they  continued  to  do  so  in  Po- 
land; but  a  long  time  before,  in  the  fifteenth,  sixteenth,  and 
seventeenth  centuries,  their  power  had  been  broken  in 
Spain,  in  France,  in  England,  and  elsewhere,  and  strong, 
powerful,  centralized  governments  erected.  By  the  time 
of  Philip  II  (1556-1598)  the  knag  of  Spain  had  absolute 
power,  and  by  the  time  of  Louis  XIV  (1643-1715)  the  king 
of  France  could  have  made  the  declaration:  "I  am  the 
State."  And  the  tendency  toward  absolute  power  and 
belief  in  the  divine  right  of  rulers  had  spread  all  over 
Europe.  It  was  so  in  Austria,  in  Russia,  in  the  larger 
German  states  and  also  in  the  smaller.  There  were  only 
a  few  exceptions.  Venice,  in  name  a  republic,  was  ruled 
by  an  oligarchy  of  aristocrats.  In  Switzerland  and  in 
the  Dutch  Netherlands  there  were  confederations  of  small 
states  ruled  by  the  citizens  of  their  upper  and  middle 
classes.  In  Germany  there  were  still  a  few  free  cities. 
But  the  notable  exception  was  England.  In  England 
there  was  indeed  an  effective  central  government,  and  in  in 
the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  there  had  been  England 
strong  tendency  to  make  the  power  of  the  king  absolute. 
But  in  England  there  survived  what  had  once  existed  in 


IS 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Primacy 
of  the 
European 
states 


Spain  and  France  and  other  places  but  had  long  since 
withered  away,  a  parliament,  or  assembly  of  representa- 
tives of  the  upper  classes.  On  the  continent  usually  danger 
from  foreign  enemies  had  been  so  great  that  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  upper  classes,  the  estates,  had  given  power 
of  taxation  and  military  control  to  the  king;  but  English- 
men, secure  from  invasion  in  their  island,  had  not  had  to 
do  this.  In  the  seventeenth  century  this  parliament  had 
contested  with  the  king  for  the  principal  power  in  the 
state;  after  1688  it  got  to  be  definitely  superior  to  the 
king;  and  it  made  of  England,  what  no  other  great  state 
then  was:  a  limited,  constitutional  monarchy.  But  almost 
everywhere  in  Europe  toward  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  political  power  was  completely  in  the  hands  of 
great  rulers  or  small  princes,  while  around  them  were 
grouped  the  upper  classes  in  possession  of  the  high  oflSces* 
the  wealth  and  privileges  of  the  land.  In  England  the 
principal  difference  was  that  the  power  of  the  king  was 
shared  with  the  upper  classes. 

This  Europe  of  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  was 
the  seat  of  the  largest  amount  of  the  power  and  impor- 
tance of  the  world  and  of  most  of  the  world's  civilization. 
There  were  in  Europe  more  civilized  men  and  women  or- 
ganized under  efficient  governments,  with  powerful  armies 
and  ships  of  war,  and  directed  by  restless,  enterprising 
rulers,  than  anywhere  else  in  the  world.  They  had  for 
some  time  been  expanding  into  other  continents, 
and  in  great  part  Europeans  had  by  this  time  taken  North 
and  South  America.  Already  the  Russians  in  Siberia  and 
the  English  in  India  had  got  control  of  large  portions  of 
Asia.  Australia  and  New  Zealand  had  just  been  visited 
by  the  English.  Africa,  except  for  trading  stations  along 
the  coast,  was  not  yet  taken,  as  it  was  to  be  completely 
In  the  next  hundred  years.  There  was  a  fine  old  culture 
among  the  warlike  people  of  Japan,  and  a  better  and  older 
civilization  among  the  swarming  millions  of  China;  but 


Britain 


THE  OLD  EUROPE  IS 

China  and  Japan  were  far  off  on  the  edge  of  the  world. 
A  strange  and  ancient  culture  endured  also  among  the 
teeming  myriads  of  India;  but  there  was  neither  political 
greatness  nor  military  power  in  India's  people,  and  already 
they  had  come  under  the  direction  of  the  English  East 
India  Company.  There  was  still  a  Persia,  but  all  of  her 
grandeur  was  gone.  Greatness,  progress,  power,  and 
wealth  were  mostly  in  Europe,  especially  in  the  western 
parts,  or  else  in  some  portions  of  America,  where  men  from 
Europe  had  gone. 

First  of  European  states  was  Great  Britain.  The  in-  Great 
habitants  had  been  fortunate  in  the  greater  part  of  the 
British  Isles.  Early  in  the  Middle  Ages,  while  other 
peoples  were  still  divided  among  numerous  feudal  lords, 
the  English  had  been  brought  together  as  one  nation  in  a 
strongly  organized,  well  administered  state.  Usually  safe 
in  their  island  from  foreign  foes,  they  were  spared  most  of 
the  horrors  of  invasion  and  devastation  so  frequent  then. 
Wales  was  early  united  with  England,  and  Scotland  finally 
in  1707,  so  that  all  the  people  of  the  greatest  of  the  British 
Isles  were  brought  together.  With  their  union  came  more 
and  more  prosperity  and  strength.  The  people  of  Britain 
had  long  been  renowned  for  their  boldness  and  skill  on  the 
sea.  After  the  discovery  of  America,  and  as  the  northern 
part  of  Europe  became  what  the  southern  part  had  pre- 
viously been,  the  wealthier  and  greater  portion,  it  was  seen 
that  Britain  had  for  commerce  and  trade  the  most  advan- 
tageous position  in  Europe.  Many  of  the  best  routes  of 
trade  lay  so  near  as  to  be  within  her  control.  In  the  seven- 
teenth and  eighteenth  centuries  she  became  the  greatest 
commercial  nation  in  the  world,  obtaining  supremacy  on 
the  sea,  with  dominating  positions  upon  the  principal  sea 
lanes  of  the  world,  and  she  was  presently  the  greatest  of 
the  colonial  powers,  with  the  exception  of  decadent  Spain. 
From  the  Dutch,  from  the  Spaniards,  and  especially  from 
the  French,  she  took  dominions  in  all  parts  of  the  earth. 


14 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


adding  them  to  the  colonies  which  her  people  had  estab- 
Prosperity  lished  in  eastern  North  America.  Her  shipping,  her 
commerce,  her  colonies  all  brought  riches,  and  the  British 
became  the  wealthiest  people  in  Europe.  Then  from  the 
middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  onward  certain  great 
mechanical  inventions — like  the  steam  engine,  the  power 
loom,  better  means  of  transportation  within  the  island,  and 
the  utilization  of  great  deposits  of  coal  and  iron — gradually 
brought  about  the  Industrial  Revolution,  which  by  the 
end  of  the  century  had  given  to  England  and  Scotland  an 
industrial  leadership  almost  as  marked  as  the  previous 
commercial  greatness.  The  government  of  Britain  was 
in  the  hands  of  the  upper  classes  and  administered  mostly 
in  their  interests;  but  as  things  then  were  that  government 
was  enlightened  and  good;  there  was  protection  of  the  law 
for  all  men;  and  however  lowly  their  condition  the  common 
people  in  England  were  apparently  better  off  than  any 
other  people  in  Europe.  This  was  not  the  case  with  Ireland, 
which  had  been  conquered,  confiscated,  and  oppressed. 
France  On  the  continent  the  great  state  was  France.     The  con- 

dition of  most  of  her  people  was  less  good  than  that  of  the 
British,  but  better  than  elsewhere.  The  government  of 
France  was  a  strongly  centralized  monarchy,  with  all 
power  in  the  hands  of  the  king,  who  was  assisted  by  coun- 
cillors and  ministers  chosen  by  himself.  Because  in 
France  there  were  twice  as  many  highly  civilized  people 
under  one  strong  government  as  in  any  other  state  at  that 
time,  the  French  monarchy,  when  managed  by  capable 
administrators,  towered  above  all  its  neighbors,  just  as 
'  after  1900  the  German  Empire  was  so  threatening  and 
great.  But  during  the  eighteenth  century  the  affairs  of 
France  had  not  been  well  handled;  she  had  fought  costly 
wars  and  gained  little  from  them,  and  in  the  prolonged 
duel  with  England  had  lost  most  of  her  colonial  empire. 
She  had  just  assisted  the  American  rebels  and  this  had 
ruined  her  finances.     France  was  still  the  leading  nation 


THE  OLD  EUROPE 


15 


on  the  continent  of  Europe,  but  she  no  longer  had  the 
vast  preponderance  which  had  once  overshadowed  all 
others.  England  was  wealthier,  and  more  successful. 
Yet  France  was  still  the  leader  of  European  civilization. 
Everywhere  her  language  was  known  and  used  by  edu- 
cated people;  the  letters  of  Horace  Walpole  contain  num- 
erous French  phrases,  and  most  of  the  works  of  Frederick 
the  Great  were  written  in  that  tongue.  The  French  style 
of  writing  simple,  clear,  and  elegant  prose,  was  everywhere 
admired,  and  in  some  other  languages,  like  the  English, 
successfully  followed.  The  grandeur  of  the  French  court 
was  imitated  all  over  central  and  eastern  Europe.  The 
most  liberal  and  progressive  ideas  of  the  age  were  being 
disseminated  by  French  philosophical  writers.  The  art, 
the  styles,  the  taste  of  Paris,  then  as  now  set  the  standard 
for  Europe. 

Spain,  once  so  powerful,  had  withdrawn  into  the  stillness 
of  drowsy  decay.  She  had  been  the  greatest  power  in 
Europe  during  the  sixteenth  century,  but  unwise  legislation 
had  long  before  stifled  her  enterprise,  religious  narrowness 
had  crushed  intellectual  activity,  and  her  people,  too  proud 
to  work,  too  ignorant  and  incompetent  to  succeed,  had  gone 
steadily  down  into  lowly  position.  A  hundred  years 
before  there  had  been  a  memorable  contest  to  get  posses- 
sion of  the  Spanish  Empire,  and  the  result  of  that  War  of 
the  Spanish  Succession  (1702-1714)  had  been  that  a 
French  prince  succeeded  to  the  crown  of  Spain,  but  that 
the  Spanish  possessions  in  Italy  and  the  Netherlands 
passed  to  Austria.  Spain  still  retained  almost  all  of  her 
wealthy  colonial  empire,  but  the  inhabitants  of  these 
places,  especially  in  Spanish  America,  were  held  in  tutelage 
and  subordination,  and  longed  to  imitate  England's 
American  colonies  in  breaking  away  and  becoming  inde- 
pendent. 

What  is  Belgium  now  was  the  Austrian  Netherlands 
then,   denied    opportunity   and    backward,   coveted    by 


French 
civilization 


Spain 


The  Nether- 
lands 


16 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  Italian 
lands 


The  Scandi- 
navian coun- 
tries 


The 
Germanies 


France,  and  often  the  battle-ground  for  foreign  armies. 
The  other  Netherlands,  which  are  now  Holland,  were 
independent  and  powerful  and  wealthy.  Their  commerce 
was  still  lucrative  and  vast,  and  their  colonies  in  the  East 
Indies  were  rich;  but  they  no  longer  did  the  carrying  trade 
of  Europe,  their  naval  power  had  diminished  before  Eng- 
land's, and  on  land  they  had  been  exhausted  in  defending 
themselves  against  the  French.  They  were  no  longer  one 
of  the  great  European  powers. 

Italy  was  a  land  of  splendid  monuments  and  glorious 
memories;  but  glory,  prosperity,  and  power  had  long  since 
departed.  There  was  much  wealth,  but  it  was  in  the  hands 
of  churchmen  or  great  nobles.  The  masses  were  very 
miserable  and  poor,  for  commerce  and  industry  had  de- 
cayed. It  was  long  since  Italians  had  controlled  their 
political  affairs.  Often  they  had  been  the  prey  of  invad- 
ers; for  a  long  time  they  had  been  ruled  by  foreign  masters. 
Once  Spain  had  controlled  them;  but  now  the  states  in  the 
north  were  ruled  under  Austria;  those  in  the  southern  part 
by  Bourbon  princes,  of  the  house  which  ruled  France  and 
Spain;  while  across  the  central  part  of  the  peninsula  ex- 
tended the  dominions  of  the  Pope. 

Outside  the  circle  of  grandeur  and  power  were  the  Scan- 
dinavian countries.  A  great  while  before  they  had  been 
the  terror  of  the  rest  of  Europe,  and  from  them  pirates, 
settlers,  and  conquerors  had  gone  forth  to  Russia,  to  Italy, 
to  France,  to  England,  and  even  to  America.  But  Den- 
mark, the  most  richly  endowed,  was  small;  the  others  had 
poor  resources  and  no  numerous  population ;  and  long  since 
their  strength  had  declined  before  the  growing  greatness 
of  more  fortunate  neighbors  to  the  south.  Sweden  still 
had  the  relics  of  her  old  possessions,  eastern  Pomerania  and 
the  country  of  Finland;  but  she  only  looked  on  now  at  large 
affairs,  as  did  Denmark,  to  whom  Norway  was  subject. 

Central  Europe  was,  as  it  long  had  been,  in  the  hands 
of  Germanic  powers.     All  through  the  Middle  Ages  Ger- 


THE  OLD  EUROPE 


17 


Austria 


mans  had  contested  with  Slavic  peoples  coming  westward, 
and  in  the  long  struggle  German  sovereigns  had  pushed 
their  territories  to  the  eastward,  until  in  the  north,  in 
Prussia,  perhaps  the  largest  element  of  the  population  was 
Slavic,  while  in  the  south  Austria  had  built  up  a  great 
group  of  possessions  mostly  peopled  by  subject  Slavs.  The 
German  states,  the  Germanics,  were  grouped  together  in 
the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  an  agglomeration  of  more  than  The  Empire 
three  hundred  separate,  independent  states,  of  which  two, 
Austria  and  Prussia,  were  great  European  powers  now;  a 
few  others,  like  Bavaria,  were  prominent;  while  altogether 
less  than  one  hundred  were  large  enough  to  have  any  im- 
portance, the  rest  being  small  free  cities  or  territories  of 
imperial  knights.  They  were  loosely  held  together  by 
old  custom,  and  by  the  common  possession  of  German 
language  and  culture.  According  to  the  law  of  this  cus- 
tom they  were  all  part  of  a  Reich  ruled  by  a  Kaiser  whose 
oJQfice  was  virtually  hereditary  in  the  house  of  Austria. 
He  was  the  object  of  much  veneration  and  respect,  but 
his  authority  was  only  nominal,  except  in  his  own  numer- 
ous possessions.  The  rulers  of  the  other  states  heeded 
the  central  government  only  as  they  wished,  or  not  at  all. 
In  the  War  of  the  Spanish  Succession  Bavaria  had  been  an 
ally  of  France,  and  the  Seven  Years'  War  (1756-1763) 
was  partly  a  terrible  struggle  between  Austria  and  Prussia. 
As  the  eighteenth  century  neared  its  close  Austria  still 
maintained  such  headship  as  there  was,  but  in  the  north 
Prussia  was  rising  as  an  ever  mightier  rival. 

Generally  speaking  the  people  of  these  German  states 
were  in  lowly  and  humble  condition.  In  the  eastern 
and  southern  parts,  especially,  most  of  them  were  serfs; 
nowhere  did  they  have  any  influence  in  the  affairs  of  their 
governments,  but  were  everywhere  ruled  by  sovereigns 
whether  great  or  petty  who  were  the  source  of  all  govern- 
ment and  law.  Many  of  these  lands  had  not  yet  recovered 
from  the  effects  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War  (1618-1648), 


Conditions 
in  the   Ger- 
man lands 


18 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


German 
culture 


The  Slavs 


Poland 


Russia 


which  had  once  destroyed  most  of  their  wealth  and  the 
larger  part  of  the  population.  Industry  had  declined, 
commerce  lans^uished,  the  people  were  exceedingly  poor, 
and  far  less  well  off  than  the  inhabitants  of  England  and  of 
France.  Some  of  the  German  states,  however,  were  cen- 
ters of  magnificent  literary  and  intellectual  activity.  It 
was  at  Weimar  about  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century 
that  Goethe  and  Schiller  did  the  greatest  writing  which 
has  ever  been  accomplished  in  German;  and  it  was  in  the 
East  Prussian  city  of  Konigsberg  that  Immanuel  Kant 
wrote  the  philosophical  works  which  exhibit  him  as  the 
foremost  thinker  since  Aristotle's  time. 

To  the  east  and  the  south  of  the  Germanic  lands  were  the 
Slavic  peoples.  Some  had  long  before  been  incorporated 
into  the  possessions  of  German  rulers,  like  the  peoples  of 
Bohemia  and  Moravia,  which  were  governed  by  the  Aus- 
trian sovereign.  In  the  Balkan  peninsula,  the  South  Slavs 
had  long  since  been  submerged  beneath  the  power  of  the 
Turks.  To  the  east  of  the  Austrian  and  the  Prussian 
possessions  was  Poland,  greatest  of  the  Slavic  powers  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  but  now  near  to  her  end.  In  Poland  a 
strong  central  government  had  never  been  erected;  the 
authority  of  the  king  was  but  nominal,  and  power  con- 
tinued, as  in  medieval  times,  in  the  hands  of  numerous 
feudal  lords,  tenacious  of  old  prerogative  and  extremely 
jealous  of  their  rights.  In  the  eighteenth  century  Poland 
was  surrounded  by  great  neighbors,  Russia,  Austria,  and 
Prussia,  who  coveted  her  lands.  Even  in  the  midst  of  this 
threatening  danger  the  central  government  could  not  be- 
come stronger  nor  did  the  internal  weakness  and  jealousies 
end.  Accordingly  Poland  was  being  destroyed.  Already 
in  1772  the  so-called  First  Partition  had  taken  place,  her 
outlying  possessions  being  seized  by  her  rivals.  A  little 
later  she  was  destined  to  disappear  completely. 

Half  of  Europe,  in  many  respects  the  most  backward 
part,  was  comprised  in  the  great  Empire  of  Russia.    During 


THE   OLD  EUROPE  19 

the  Middle  Ages  the  different  Slavic  peoples  who  lived  up* 
on  the  great  plain  of  eastern  Europe  had  suffered  terrible 
subjection  and  degradation  from  Tartar  marauders  and 
Mongol  invaders.  Gradually,  later  on,  a  strong  inland 
state  was  built  up  by  Russian  rulers  about  Moscow.  For 
a  long  time  the  connections  of  the  people  were  with  Asia 
rather  than  with  the  rest  of  Europe,  but  in  course  of  time 
the  waters  of  the  Baltic  Sea  were  reached,  and  after  the 
time  of  Peter  the  Great  (1682-1725)  Russia  was  an  im- 
portant European  power.  Afterward  a  succession  of  able 
rulers  carried  forward  her  boundaries  to  the  south  and 
the  west,  so  that  in  the  closing  years  of  the  eighteenth 
century  she  reached  the  north  shore  of  the  Black  Sea, 
and,  in  another  direction,  the  confines  of  Austria  and 
Prussia. 

Her  people,  different  in  race  from  their  neighbors  to  the  The 
west,  differed  also  in  religion,  the  Greek  Catholic  faith.  Russian 
The  Tsar  of  the  Russias  was  absolute  in  power;  under  him 
were  great  officials  and  numerous  unimportant  nobles; 
there  were  a  few  merchants  and  artisans  in  the  widely 
scattered  cities;  but  the  immense  number  of  the  inhabitants 
of  this  great  domain  were  debased  and  ignorant  peasants, 
living  in  their  lonely  little  villages  on  the  plain  or  in  the 
vast  forests:  dirty,  stolid,  ignorant,  and  dreamy,  but  brave 
as  soldiers  in  defence  of  their  right,  and  capable,  if  ever 
opportunity  came,  of  rising  to  better  things.  The  great 
movements  of  the  French  Revolution  would  not  go  far 
enough  across  Europe  to  reach  them,  and  the  Industrial 
Revolution  was  not  to  get  to  Russia  until  late  in  the  nine- 
teenth century;  so  that  for  a  hundred  years  more  their 
condition  was  to  change  almost  not  at  all. 

Finally,  to  the  south  there  was  the  inert  bulk  of  the    The  Otto- 
Ottoman  Empire,  which  once  had  threatened  all  peoples    man^Empire 
near  by.     From  the  capital  at  Constantinople,  with  its 
unrivalled  position,  the  Turks   ruled  broad  domains  in 
Asia  Minor  and  beyond,  and,  in  Europe,  Greece,  all  of  the 


20  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

Balkan  peninsula,  and  the  country  up  to  the  Danube. 
The  strength  of  their  military  organization  had  declined, 
and  their  ancient  prowess  had  diminished.  Like  Spain 
at  the  other  end  of  Europe  their  Empire  was  sunk  in  leth- 
argy and  decadence.  But  they  still  had  the  power  to 
hold  their  subject  Christian  population,  and  perhaps  no 
other  people  in  Europe  lived  under  quite  so  degrading  and 
brutal  tyranny  as  the  Southern  Slavs  of  the  Balkans. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

For  additional  general  introductory  reading :  Arthur  Hassall, 
The  Balance  of  Pmoer,  1715-1789  (1896);  A.  H.  Johnson,  The 
Age  of  the  Enlightened  Despots,  1660-1789  (1910). 

Great  Britain:  C.  G.  Robertson,  England  under  the  Han- 
overians (1911);  W.  E.  H.  Lecky,  A  History  of  England  in  the 
Eighteenth  Century ,  8  vols.  (1878-90),  the  best  for  this  period; 
the  best  of  the  general  histories  of  England  is  the  cooperative 
work.  The  Political  History  of  England,  ed.  by  the  Rev.  William 
Hunt,  R.  L.  Poole,  12  vols.  (1905-10). 

France:  A.  J.  Grant,  The  French  Monarchy,  U8S-1789,  2 
vols.  (1900) ;  J.  B.  Perkins,  France  under  Louis  XV,  2  vols.  (1897). 
The  best  and  most  important  history  of  France  is  the  great 
cooperative  work  edited  by  E.  Lavisse,  Histoire  de  France 
depuis  les  Origines  jusqua  la  Revolution,  9  vols,  in  18  (1900-10). 

Spain:  G.  D.  du  Dezert,  VEspagne  de  VAncien  Regime,  3 
vols.  (1897-1904);  M.  A.  S.  Hume,  Spain:  Its  Greatness  and 
Decay  {U79-1788)  (1898). 

Austria:  Archdeacon  William  Coxe,  History  of  the  House  of 
Austria  frmn  1218  to  1792  (many  editions);  Franz  Krones, 
Handbuch  der  Geschichte  Oesterreichs,  5  vols.  (1876-9);  Henry 
Marczali,  Hungary  in  the  Eighteenth  Century  (1910). 

The  Germanics:  G.  M.  Priest,  Germany  since  17J^0  (1915); 
Karl  Biedermann,  Deutschland  im  Achtzehnten  Jahrhundert,  2 
vols.  (1867-80) ;  Norwood  Young,  The  Life  of  Frederick  the  Great 
(1919),  hostile  and  critical;  Reinhold  Koser,  Geschichte  Friedrichs 
des  Grossen,  4  vols.  (1912-14),  the  authoritative  work. 

Russia:  Alfred  Rambaud,  Histoire  de  la  Russie  depuis  les 
Origines  jusqu* a  Nos  Jours  (6th  ed.  1914),  an  English  translation 
by  Leonora  B.  Lang,  2  vols.  (1879) ;  V.  O.  Kliuchevsky,  abridged 
and  trans,  by  C.  J.  Hogarth,  A  History  of  Russia,  3  vols.  (1911- 


'I 
-J 


2.    RELIEF  I 


I  EUROPE 


THE   OLD  EUROPE  21 

13),  to  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century,  best  account  of  the 
early  period;  E.  A.  B.  Hodgetts,  The  Life  of  Catherine  the  Great 
of  Russia  (1914).  For  the  Slavs  generally:  R.  N.  Bain,  Slav- 
onic Europe  (1912). 

The  Ottoman  Dominions:  Stanley  Lane-Poole,  The  Story  of 
Turkey  (1897) ;  Nicolae  Jorga,  Geschichtedes  Osmanischen  Reiches, 
5  vols.  (1908-13),  the  best. 


CHAPTER    II 


The  Euro- 
pean frontier 
in  America 


Separation 


SEPARATION    OF    THE 
COMMUNITIES    IN    AMERICA 

Thus  at  the  beginning  the  American  colonies  formed  but  a  part,  and 
comparatively  speaking  but  a  small  part,  of  that  great  western 
frontier  of  the  European  nations.     .     .     . 
C.  M.  Andrews,  The  Colonial  Period  (1912),  p.  11. 

The  transmission  of  the  heritage  of  European  culture  to  the  New 
World  and  its  inhabitants,  the  great  work  of  the  colonial  epoch.  .  . 
E.  G.  Bourne,  Spain  in  America  (1904),  p.  S0«. 

Just  about  the  time  when  the  new  era  of  European  his- 
tory begins,  most  of  the  outlying  parts  of  the  European 
world,  in  America  then,  broke  away  from  the  parent  states, 
and  began  their  separate  careers.  The  populations  of  the 
French  and  English  settlements  in  North  America,  the 
Spanish  and  Portuguese  commimities  of  Mexico  and  the 
continent  to  the  south,  were  in  the  days  of  the  old  era 
merely  faraway  frontiers  of  the  European  world.  That 
later  on  some  of  them  were  to  become  nations  of  vast  re- 
sources and  greatness  could  not  then  be  foreseen.  The 
indifference  which  most  Europeans  then  had  for  the  dis- 
tant possessions  over  the  seas  was  heightened  about  the 
end  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  during  the  generations 
that  followed  because  those  communities  renounced  their 
allegiance  to  the  parent  nations  and  for  a  long  time  went 
forward  on  separate  courses,  shrinking  from  participation 
in  European  affairs,  aloof  from  the  world.  Just  before 
the  French  Revolution  most  of  the  British  colonies  on  the 
mainland  of  North  America  won  independence.     After 

22 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA 


1810  the  Spanish  colonies  began  to  gain  independence. 
Since  that  time  Americans  have  thought  of  their  history 
and  civiHzation  as  things  apart  from  Europe;  but  in  the 
long  years  before  the  separation  took  place  the  colonies 
were  settlements  of  European  people  having  as  inher- 
itance the  best  things  their  fathers  had  worked  out  in 
the  past;  and  even  after  the  break,  their  civilization  re- 
mained essentially  what  it  had  been  from  the  first,  the 
culture  of  Europe  transplanted  to  new  regions. 

The  discovery  and  occupation  of  America  are  part  of  America 
an  earlier  age.  The  best-informed  people  of  antiquity 
believed  that  the  world  was  round,  as  did  numerous 
thinkers  and  mariners  of  the  Middle  Ages.  But  they  had 
no  reason  to  believe  that  there  was  any  large  body  of  land 
lying  between  Europe  and  Asia,  so  when  in  1492  Christo- 
pher Columbus  set  out  from  a  Spanish  port,  it  was  toward 
Asia  that  he  thought  he  was  sailing,  and  it  was  India  he 
expected  to  reach.  He  died  believing  that  what  he  dis- 
covered was  some  part  of  India  which  travellers  had  not 
formerly  reached.  A  few  years  more,  however,  and  fur- 
ther explorations  convinced  geographers  that  a  new  land 
indeed  had  been  found;  and  so  in  1507  Martin  Waldsee- 
miiller  of  St.  Die  proposed  that  the  lands  in  the  south  re- 
cently described  by  Amerigo  Vespucci  be  called  America 
after  his  name.  From  the  southern  continent  this  was 
presently  extended  to  all  lands  in  the  western  hemisphere, 
as  men  realized  that  they  were  no  part  of  Asia  but  a  new 
portion  of  the  surface  of  the  earth. 

These  new  lands  were  claimed  for  Spain.  Since  it  was 
believed  in  the  beginning  that  another  route  to  India  had 
been  discovered,  and  since  the  Portuguese  had  already 
opened  up  a  route  of  their  own  to  that  part  of  the  world, 
the  Pope,  in  1493  and  1494,  divided  the  newly  discovered 
countries  between  them,  by  a  perpendicular  line  to  the 
west  of  the  Azores,  Portugal  getting  what  lay  to  the  east, 
and  Spain  what  lay  to  the  west.     Hence  it  was  that  the 


The  Spanish 
colonial  em- 
pire 


24 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Early  pre- 
eminence of 
Portugal  and 
Spain 


New 
France 


The 
Dutch 


Portuguese  obtained  the  eastern  part  of  South  America, 
soon  known  as  Brazil.  All  the  rest  of  South  America  and 
all  the  southern  portion  of  North  America  were  taken  by 
the  Spaniards  and  occupied  for  them  by  a  company  of 
navigators  and  explorers.  By  the  end  of  the  sixteenth 
century  the  Spaniards  had  acquired  the  largest  and  richest 
possessions  that  any  colonial  empire  ever  had  contained. 

It  was  partly  the  geographical  position  of  Portugal  and 
Spain,  partly  the  magnificent  work  of  the  able  sailors  who 
served  them,  partly  a  series  of  fortunate  accidents  which 
gave  them  their  early  advantage.  The  people  of  eastern 
and  central  Europe  were  too  remote  and  too  little  skilled 
in  maritime  affairs  to  enter  into  any  competition:  Italy 
now  decayed  rapidly  with  the  loss  of  her  old  trade  routes 
and  in  her  subjection  to  foreign  masters;  and  England, 
France,  and  the  Netherlands  were  throughout  the  six- 
teenth century  absorbed  in  struggles  growing  out  of  the 
Reformation.  But  by  1600  Holland  had  practically  won 
her  independence  from  Spain,  and  the  people  of  England 
and  of  France  had  largely  settled  their  domestic  difficulties 
and  become  strong  and  ambitious  nations.  All  of  them 
had  been  involved  in  hostilities  with  Spain,  and  they  all 
struck  back  by  attacking  the  Spanish  treasure  fleets  and 
making  raids  on  her  settlements  in  America.  Further- 
more, they  were  no  longer  willing  to  be  bound  by  the  edict 
of  the  Pope,  which  had  given  most  of  America  and  its  seas 
exclusively  to  Spain.  About  the  same  time  France  and 
Holland  began  to  make  settlements  in  North  America. 
In  1608  Frenchmen  made  a  permanent  settlement  at  Que- 
bec, and  New  France  was  founded.  Then  explorers  and 
missionaries  pushing  up  the  St.  Lawrence,  along  by  the 
Great  Lakes,  down  the  vast  central  valley  of  the  continent 
and  down  the  Mississippi  to  the  Gulf,  laid  out,  at  least  in 
their  plans,  a  magnificent  empire,  the  holding  of  which 
would  ultimately  have  made  them  masters  of  North 
America.     The  Dutch  had  been  busier  in  taking  away  the 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA       25 


rich  possessions  of  the  Portuguese  in  the  Far  East,  but  they 
also  turned  their  attention  to  North  America,  and  in  1614 
founded  the  New  Netherlands,  in  the  finest  situation  on  the 
Atlantic  coast. 

In  the  service  of  England  John  Cabot  had  discovered 
North  America  in  1497,  but  a  hundred  years  went  by  with 
little  more  progress.  Toward  the  end  of  the  sixteenth 
century  the  English  established  a  claim  upon  Newfound- 
land, and  made  some  unsuccessful  attempts  to  establish 
plantations  on  the  mainland.  The  first  successful  colony, 
however,  was  Virginia,  founded  in  1607  by  a  trading  com- 
pany. It  was  followed  shortly  after  by  settlements,  in 
1620  and  1630,  of  Pilgrims  and  Puritans  in  Massachusetts. 

England  was  not  overpopulated,  but  a  variety  of  causes 
contributed  now  to  the  founding  of  a  series  of  colonies 
along  the  middle  part  of  the  North  American  coast,  and 
to  the  emigration  thither  of  many  people  from  England. 
Opportunities  for  making  a  fortune,  which  war  and  cru- 
sades had  once  offered  to  adventurous  men,  were  now  to 
be  found  in  great  commercial  enterprises,  and  great  new 
chartered  trading  companies  were  founded  with  a  mo- 
nopoly of  trade  in  some  particular  district  or  body  of  waters. 
Wondrous  tales  came  to  Europe  of  the  silver  of  Mexico 
and  the  gold  of  Peru.  It  was  thought  that  they  were 
making  the  Spanish  people  wealthy;  and  speculators  and 
investors  were  eager  to  take  shares  in  companies  to  exploit 
the  land  which  Cabot  once  found  for  the  king.  Thus 
Virginia  and  other  colonies  were  founded.  It  was  also  a 
period  when  civil  and  religious  strife  was  still  very  bitter. 
The  Reformation  in  England  had  been  a  compromise  be- 
tween Catholicism,  the  old  faith,  and  the  extreme  changes 
which  more  radical  reformers  demanded.  The  Church  of 
England,  established  in  the  sixteenth  century,  was  accepted 
by  most  of  the  people,  but  a  considerable  body  of  men, 
Puritans,  Presbyterians,  Independents,  strove  to  have  the 
Episcopal  Church  "purified"  and  further  "reformed."     In 


The 
English 


Reasons  for 
English  ex- 
pansion 


Religious 
troubles 


26 


EUROPE.   1789-1920 


Proprietary 
rights 


Remoteness 

from 

Europe 


the  period  before  1640  they  were  sternly  repressed.  Many 
lost  heart,  and  resolved  to  go  forth  far  away  from  the  reach 
of  prelates  and  king,  to  worship  and  be  governed  as  they 
wished.  Such  was  the  origin  of  the  most  important  settle- 
ments made  in  New  England,  some  of  the  leaders  organiz- 
ing themselves  to  act  in  corporate  capacity  and  obtain 
charters.  Finally,  during  the  seventeenth  century,  while 
the  king  himself  at  no  time  undertook  to  colonize  the  do- 
minions which  were  legally^his,  yet  out  of  these  faraway 
estates  of  the  crown,  he  sometimes  paid  his  debts  or 
rewarded  his  followers  and  friends,  giving  them,  as  pro- 
prietors, broad  American  lands.  Thus  it  was  that  Lord 
Baltimore  got  the  province,  indeed  the  palatinate,  of 
Maryland;  so  Penn  got  his  lands  from  Charles  II;  so  was 
Carolina  established,  and  afterward  Georgia.  These  pro- 
prietary lords  strove  by  every  means  in  their  power  to 
encourage  settlers  to  come,  to  increase  the  value  of  their 
lands  and  get  greater  revenue  from  them.  Penn  even  had 
agents  in  the  Low  Countries  and  the  German  lands  down 
the  Rhine  urging  the  poor  and  harassed  to  seek  refuge  by 
the  Delaware  with  him.  Accordingly,  about  the  middle 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  English  settlements  and  colonies 
stretched  all  down  the  Atlantic  coast  of  North  America 
from  where  Maine  is  in  the  north  to  the  southern  frontier 
of  Georgia;  and  this  extent  was  complete  and  unbroken, 
for  in  1664  England  had  seized  from  the  Dutch  their  pro- 
vince of  New  Netherlands,  and  called  it  New  York. 

In  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  this  Amer- 
ica was  a  distant  land,  almost  as  remote  as  Thule 
once  had  been,  much  farther  from  Europe  then  than 
Alaska  seems  now,  as  far,  perhaps,  as  St.  Helena  or  the  Falk- 
land Islands.  Many  people  in  Europe,  if  they  thought 
about  the  American  countries,  must  have  regarded  them  as 
vague,  vast  places,  where  great  treasure  was  sometimes 
found,  where  strange  savages  and  monsters  dwelt,  where 
fortune  might  await  the  bold   and  the  hardy.    Those 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA       27 


who  voyaged  across  the  Atlantic  to  find  new  homes 
could  seldom  return.  It  took  weeks  to  make  the  cross- 
ing, and  cost  of  the  passage  was  high.  Yet  it  should 
be  remembered  that  all  traveling  was  difficult  then,  that 
it  was  easier  by  water  than  by  land,  and  that  New  Spain, 
the  West  Indies,  and  the  middle  coast  of  North  Amer- 
ica seemed  nearer  and  were  better  known  to  western  Europe 
than  the  country  beyond  Moscow  or  the  Balkans.  After 
a  while  it  seemed  to  these  folk  of  western  Europe  that 
the  little  ships  which  went  sailing  out  from  Seville,  from 
Plymouth,  or  St.  Malo  were  going  across  the  waste  of 
waters  to  a  New  Spain,  a  New  England,  a  New  France, 
where  their  kinsmen  had  made  in  the  islands  of  the  ocean 
or  along  the  continental  coast  European  outposts  on  the 
outer  fringe  of  the  mighty  wilderness  that  stretched  on  be- 
yond them. 

European  civilization  and  life  soon  came  to  predominate 
in  the  new  world.  In  South  America  there  was  a  con- 
siderable population  of  aborigines,  especially  in  the  Peru- 
vian Empire,  but  altogether  the  country  was  thinly  settled. 
In  parts  of  Central  America  and  in  Mexico  also  there  were 
many  Indians  in  that  stage  of  culture  which  marks  the 
beginning  of  civilization;  but  beyond,  throughout  the 
northern  continent  there  were  only  meager  tribes  settled 
in  some  places  and  a  handful  of  roaming  nomads.  So 
there  was  no  difficulty  in  establishing  in  America  the  life 
and  the  customs  which  men  had  once  known  in  Spain,  in 
the  marts  of  Holland,  in  the  parishes  and  seaports  of 
England,  and  the  villages  and  cities  of  old  France.  The 
culture  of  Spanish  America  was  that  of  Spain  taken  to  new 
surroundings.  The  old  regime  of  France  was  reproduced, 
as  far  as  could  be,  in  the  bleak  and  wild  St.  Lawrence 
valley.  The  life  of  England  was  brought  to  Massachu- 
setts and  Virginia,  to  Maryland,  to  Rhode  Island,  and 
Georgia.  These  people  would  no  more  have  thought  of 
themselves  as  Americans  than  Ovid  would  have  declared 


The 

Atlantic 

World 


European 
ciyilization 
in  America 


28  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

himself  a  man  of  the  Chersonese;  they  were  Spaniards, 
Frenchmen,  Dutchmen,  Portuguese,  or  men  of  England, 
living  in  the  most  outlying  of  the  possessions  of  their  coun- 
try, and  conceiving  the  civilization  and  customs  of  their 
country  as  the  most  precious  things  carried  along  with 
them. 

To  Peru  and  New  Spain  the  Spanish  colonists  took  their 
Spanish  language,  their  Roman  Catholic  religion,  their 
Roman  law,  and  the  local  customs  and  peculiarities  of 
character  which  had  developed  among  their  ancestors  in 
Spain.  After  the  age  of  the  conquistadoresy  the  colonists 
settled  down  to  find  their  fortune  or  make  their  living  in 
the  New  World.  Some  of  the  bolder  and  more  successful 
got  great  stretches  of  land  or  parts  that  had  mines  of  silver 
and  gold,  with  jurisdiction  over  the  native  Indians  who 
lived  on  these  lands  much  like  that  which  the  Spanish 
grandees  had  on  estates  in  Andalusia  or  Castile.  Other 
settlers  gathered  themselves  together  in  towns,  which  they 
modelled  after  what  existed  in  Spain,  electing  cabildos  or 
town  councils,  consisting  of  regidores  or  aldermen,  who 
chose  their  alcaldes  or  mayors  themselves.  As  in  Spain 
and  also  in  England,  these  bodies  came  to  be  closed  cor- 
porations, bodies  which  appointed  their  own  members. 
Govern-  In  the  Spanish  kingdoms  of  the  Middle  Ages  the  cortes  or 

™®°*  assembly  of  estates  had  been  as  flourishing  as  was  the 

similar  body,  the  parliament,  in  England.     But  this  did 
not  continue,   for  in   Spain,   as   the   sovereigns   became 
stronger,  they  went  the  same  way  that  the  kings  of  France 
'  had  gone,  and  made  their  state  strong  by  taking  all  the 

powers  of  the  government  into  their  hands,  to  be  exercised 
by  themselves  and  the  oflficials  and  councils  appointed  by 
them.  It  might  have  been  thought  that  freer  institutions 
would  have  developed  in  distant  Spanish  colonies,  as  they 
did  among  the  English  settlers,  and  we  now  know  that 
there  was  considerable  tendency  toward  this;  nevertheless, 
Spanish  colonial  government  was  concentrated  effectively 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA       29 


and  completely  in  the  hands  of  great  officers  appointed  by 
the  king. 

By  1574  the  Spanish  possessions  in  America  were  divided 
into  two  parts,  of  which  one,  New  Spain,  embraced  the 
West  Indian  islands,  the  territory  in  North  America,  and 
some  in  the  northern  part  of  the  continent  to  the  south. 
The  other,  Peru,  comprised  all  of  South  America  from 
the  Isthmus  of  Panama  to  the  southern  extremity,  except- 
ing what  is  now  Venezuela  and  the  Portuguese  country  of 
Brazil.  These  kingdoms,  or  viceroyalties,  were  governed  by 
viceroys,  the  appointees  and  personal  representatives  of  the 
king.  The  viceroyalties  were  divided  into  audiencias  and 
smaller  jurisdictions.  Later  on,  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
other  viceroyalties  and  lesser  divisions  were  established. 

Religion  had,  as  always  among  Spanish  people,  a  place 
of  immense  importance:  religious  orders  established 
their  branches  in  the  New  World;  there  were  wealthy  and 
flourishing  monasteries  and  convents,  and  stately  cathe- 
drals and  churches.  Particular  care  was  taken  to  convert 
the  Indians  to  Christianity.  The  Inquisition  also  .was 
set  up,  and  a  few  heretics  were  condemned  aifrf43tft*ftl^^ 
as  late  as  1776.  Universities  arose  at  Lima  and  in  M^SfeJ^ 
City,  where  some  of  the  teachers  gained  much  distinction. 
The  Spanish  towns  had  their  printing  presses,  their  univer- 
sities, and  their  great  church  buildings  long  before  such 
things  appeared  in  the  English  colonies.  The  Spanish- 
Americans  were  debarred  from  much  political  activity, 
and  political  offices  in  their  towns  were  bought  and  sold 
as  was  then  the  custom  in  Spain.  The  government  was  a 
paternal  despotism,  administered  by  viceroys  and  officials 
who  were  sometimes  honest  and  efficient,  sometimes  in- 
capable and  corrupt.  But  usually  the  rulers  of  Spain 
strove  to  extend  to  their  American  subjects  the  same  laws 
and  privileges  that  were  possessed  by  the  people  of 
Spain;  and  in  general  the  spirit  of  rule  was  enlightened  and 
kindly.     Special  efforts  were  made  by  the  Spanish  author- 


The  vice- 
royalties 


Spanish  cul- 
ture in  New 
Spain 


ifeilsna  9riT 


so 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


New 
France 


The  English 
colonists 


Puritans 

and 

Cavaliers 


ities  to  protect  the  Indians;  and  although  there  were 
some  barbarities  and  atrocities  at  first,  it  must  always  be 
remembered  that  the  Spanish  government  did  protect 
the  natives  so  successfully,  that  they  survived  and  in- 
creased in  numbers,  and  made  up  the  majority  of  the 
colonial  population. 

In  New  France  also  the  laws  and  customs  of  the  old 
country  were  reproduced,  the  French  language,  the  Catho- 
lic religion,  the  Roman  law,  along  with  feudal  rights  and 
seigniorial  jurisdiction,  which  still  survived  in  France. 
There  was  very  little  rule  of  the  people  by  themselves. 
But  the  history  of  New  France  is  of  less  importance  than 
that  of  New  Spain  or  of  England  in  America,  because  so 
few  Frenchmen  came  to  settle  in  the  valleys  of  the  Missis- 
sippi and  the  St.  Lawrence.  So  vast  was  the  extent  of 
territory  which  they  endeavored  to  hold  that  most  of  the 
country  was  little  affected  by  them;  and  about  the  middle 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  when  the  English  and  the 
French  fought  out  a  great  struggle,  the  British  easily  took 
away  the  French  colonies  in  America,  and  save  for  one 
district  about  Quebec,  they  have  been  possessed  by  English- 
speaking  people  ever  since. 

Many  of  the  settlers  who  came  to  the  English  colonies 
were  the  best  that  England  could  send.  The  Puritans 
and  others  who  opposed  Archbishop  Laud  and  Charles  I, 
made  up  a  class  of  people  far  more  important  because  of 
their  prosperity  and  position  than  their  mere  numbers 
might  show.  They  were  strong,  well-educated,  often 
well-to-do  people,  the  best  of  the  middle  class  and  lesser 
nobility,  narrow  in  their  outlook,  but  determined  and  in- 
dependent and  willing  to  endure  much  in  upholding  their 
cause.  It  was  from  this  class  that  Cromwell  and  Milton 
came,  and  it  contained  many  lawyers,  merchants,  pro- 
prietors, and  men  of  affairs.  It  was  by  them  very 
largely  that  New  England  was  founded.  Then  during  the 
period  of  the  Civil  Wars  somewhat  later,  when  for  a 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA       31 


while  the  Puritans  and  Independents  got  control  of 
affairs  in  England,  some  of  their  Cavalier  opponents 
took  refuge  in  American  plantations  like  Maryland  and 
Virginia. 

In  New  England  and  in  all  the  other  British  colonies  in 
America  English  law  and  custom  were  at  once  introduced; 
they  took  vigorous  root,  and  entered  upon  a  sturdy  growth. 
Many  of  the  settlers  had  had  direct  acquaintance  with 
their  government  in  England  and  taken  part  in  its  local 
administration.  Not  a  few  of  them  had  been  justices  of 
the  peace  or  county  officials,  and  most  of  them,  perhaps, 
knew  the  working  of  parish  administration.  Very  natur- 
ally they  at  once  set  up  townships  or  parishes  and  coun- 
ties, which  were  from  the  first  the  scene  of  vigorous 
political  life.  This  took  place,  then,  so  readily  in  the  English 
colonies,  because  the  English  people,  unlike  the  population 
of  Spain  or  France,  were  used  to  taking  part  in  local  gov- 
ernment. And  in  the  freer  circumstances  of  their  new 
homes  some  of  the  English  colonists  carried  government 
by  the  people  themselves  much  further  than  it  had  devel- 
oped in  England.  Over  there  in  the  parish,  which  was  the 
unit  in  which  most  of  the  people  got  their  political  exper- 
ience, only  the  pettiest  things  were  determined,  the  more 
important  parts  of  local  government  being  in  the  counties, 
and  all  of  the  central  government  in  the  hands  of  the  king 
and  the  upper  classes.  But  when  the  Puritans,  who  had 
left  England  partly  because  they  wanted  more  govern- 
ment by  the  people,  set  up  their  townships  in  New  Eng- 
land, they  made  the  town  meeting  an  assembly  of  the 
citizens  of  the  district,  who  thus  governed  themselves  in 
democratic  assembly.  They  chose  their  own  officers  for  ex- 
ecutive and  administrative  work;  and  as  the  New  England 
colonies  grew,  the  town  meetings  elected  their  representa- 
tives to*  sit  in  the  assembly  or  parliament  of  the  colony, 
thus  organizing  a  self-government  which  was  far  in  ad- 
vance of  anything  in  England  then,  and  which  later  on 


English  cul" 
ture  in 
America 


Self- 
government 
extended   in 
America 


New 
England 


32 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  other 
colonies 


Assimilative 
power  of 
English 
culture 


Manage- 
ment by  the 
colonizing 
countries 


became  a  model  for  the  government  of  the  United  States. 
Outside  of  New  England  self-government  was  also  devel- 
oped, though  in  less  striking  manner.  In  1619  the  London 
Company  bade  the  governor  whom  they  sent  to  Vir- 
ginia to  call  a  legislature  or  assembly  consisting  of  repre- 
sentatives elected  by  the  freemen  of  that  country;  and  in 
all  the  colonies  representative  assemblies  were  set  up  mod- 
eled roughly  upon  the  House  of  Commons  of  England. 
The  colonists  brought  into  their  new  homes  the  English 
common  law,  which  became  thus  the  basis  of  the  law  of  the 
United  States.  And  they  always  considered  that  they 
shared  in  the  rights  which  English  citizens  possessed,  be- 
lieving that  Magna  Carta  pertained  to  them  as  much  as 
if  they  were  living  in  England. 

Into  the  English  colonies  came  a  large  number  of  emi- 
grants from  other  countries,  oppressed  people  from  Ger- 
many and  France  and  also  from  Ireland,  and  some  of  them 
for  a  great  while  retained  their  own  language,  character- 
istics, and  customs.  But  from  the  first  the  English  in 
America  showed  a  wonderful  power  of  assimilation.  The 
foreign  immigrants  were  usually  admitted  to  a  share  in 
the  privileges  and  power  of  the  commonwealths,  and  many 
of  them  after  a  while  adopted  the  English  language,  law^ 
and  customs  of  their  own  free  will;  so  that  the  life  of  the 
country  continued  to  be  fundamentally  English.  There- 
fore, in  these  communities,  houses  and  churches  resembled 
those  of  England  in  the  time  of  Anne  or  the  Georges;  and 
customs  and  class  distinctions  existed  much  like  those  in 
eighteenth-century  England. 

Judging  in  respect  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  rather  than  the  present,  it  must  be  said  that  the 
colonists,  whether  in  New  Spain  or  New  England,  were 
well  treated.  The  British  and  the  Spanish  authorities 
both  tried  to  give  to  them  much  the  same  government 
that  they  would  have  had  in  the  mother  countries. 
There  were  differences,  indeed,  but  they  resulted  mostly 


«3^ 


I 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA 


33 


from  the  new  circumstances  in  which  the  colonists  were 
placed.  The  principal  grievances  were  economic,  mostly 
because  of  restrictions  put  upon  colonial  trade.  It  was 
the  prevailing  theory  then  that  colonies  should  supply  the 
mother  country  with  raw  materials  in  exchange  for  manu- 
factured goods,  and  that  colonial  trade  should  be  confined 
to  the  country  by  which  the  colonies  were  possessed. 
Such  commercial  restrictions  seemed  natural  and  proper 
then,  and  there  was  long  custom  and  precedent  behind 
them.  In  the  Middle  Ages  when  England  held  Calais, 
that  city  was  made  the  staple  or  place  to  which  all  ex- 
ported English  wool  must  be  sent.  Many  a  town  and 
many  a  guild  had  a  monopoly  of  some  trade,  and  the  six- 
teenth and  seventeenth  centuries  were  a  period  in  which 
many  monopolies  were  granted.  The  East  India  Com- 
pany, founded  in  1600,  had  the  sole  right  of  trading  in  the 
Far  East,  and  some  of  the  first  English  settlements  made  in 
America  were  planted  by  companies  with  similar  rights. 
The  Spanish  government  ordained  that  all  the  trading 
from  Spanish  America  should  be  with  Spain,  tried  to  con- 
fine this  trade  entirely  to  the  one  Spanish  city  of  Seville, 
and  tried  to  prevent  trade  between  the  several  Spanish 
colonies.  Likewise  the  English  government  forbade  its 
colonial  subjects  to  carry  on  manufactures,  and  tried  to 
restrict  their  trade  through  a  series  of  Navigation  Acts, 
the  purpose  of  which  was  substantially  to  debar  other 
nations  from  trading  with  the  English  colonies  and  compel 
the  colonists  to  send  most  of  their  exports  to  England. 
To  some  extent  the  Spanish  colonists  evaded  the  law, 
and  there  was  much  smuggling,  especially  after  English, 
Dutch,  and  French  settlements  were  established  in  the 
West  Indies.  The  English  colonists,  left  much  freer,  paid 
little  attention  to  the  Navigation  Acts  at  first,  and  when 
later  on  the  mother  country  tried  to  enforce  them,  this 
attempt  was  one  of  the  principal  things  which  led  to  the 
war  for  separation  and  independence. 


Colonial 
trade 


Restrictions 
on  trade 


S4 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Diftaace 


The  English 
colonists 


It  was  natural  that  the  colonists,  far  away  from  the  old 
home  and  old  conditions,  should  conceive  new  ideas  and 
give  up  the  old  more  quickly  than  the  people  in  Europe, 
and  that  mere  difference  in  circumstance  and  surroundings 
and  mere  distance  would  inevitably  cause  disagreements 
to  develop,  so  that  after  a  while  the  colonies  could  be  held 
only  by  power  and  force  or  else  through  most  skilful  ad- 
justment in  administration.  Had  they  been  very  strongly 
held  or  very  greatly  oppressed  it  is  probable  that  they 
would  long  have  endured  what  they  disliked;  but  since 
many  of  them  were  not  closely  bound  and  since  they  were 
on  the  whole  well  treated,  they  easily  chafed  at  those  things 
which  displeased  them.  It  was  natural  and  proper  that 
they  should  do  so;  but  it  should  be  remembered  that 
they  broke  away  from  the  mother  countries  because  of 
distance  and  difference  in  surroundings  rather  than  any 
oppression. 

The  people  of  the  English  colonies  in  America  were 
better  treated  than  the  inhabitants  of  any  other  colonial 
possessions  ever  had  been.  They  had  most  of  the  privi- 
leges that  people  in  England  had.  For  a  time  they  were 
left  largely  to  themselves.  The  Navigation  Acts  were  not 
strictly  enforced  and  very  little  obeyed.  The  people  who 
had  settled  New  England  were  the  most  forward  and  pro- 
gressive of  the  English  people  in  politics;  now  in  their  new 
homes  they  proceeded  along  the  path  of  political  develop- 
ment more  rapidly  than  their  kinsmen  in  England.  They 
insisted  upon  all  of  the  rights  of  Englishmen,  and  began 
to  think  of  getting  more.  The  upper  classes,  who  con- 
trolled affairs  in  the  middle  and  the  southern  colonies, 
were,  many  of  them,  in  the  position  of  the  English  gentry, 
and,  like  them,  determined  to  uphold  their  legal  and  con- 
stitutional rights.  The  colonies  were  growing  rapidly  in 
prosperity  and  power,  and  the  commercial  and  business 
leaders  were  ill  disposed  to  endure  restraints  on  their  trade. 
There  was,  to  be  sure,  the  menace  of  France  in  America, 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA        35 


but  in  1763  the  conquest  of  Canada  was  completed  by 
England,  and  the  menace  was  definitely  removed.  No 
longer  were  the  colonies  bound  to  England  by  fear  or  by 
need. 

Just  about  this  time  the  British  government  was  at- 
tempting to  devise  some  more  effective  plan  of  imperial 
administration  and  control.  Previously  no  well-organized 
scheme  of  governing  the  colonies  had  been  constructed. 
Government  was  vested  in  the  king  and  his  privy  council, 
but  government  had  been  slipping  from  royal  management 
into  the  control  of  parliament  and  the  ministers  of  the  king. 
Important  things  were  now  performed  only  by  those 
powerful  members  of  the  privy  council  who  were  of  the 
cabinet,  and  the  cabinet  had  the  management  of  many 
important  things  besides  the  colonies,  and  accordingly 
gave  them  little  attention.  There  had  been,  since  1696, 
the  Board  of  Trade  and  Plantations,  something  like  the 
Spanish  Council  of  the  Indies,  though  less  powerful  and 
organized  less  well;  but  it  could  not  enforce  its  decisions, 
and  its  recommendations  were  often  not  attended  to. 
Moreover,  now  that  the  principal  power  in  the  British 
government  was  parliament  and  not  the  king,  parliament 
attempted  to  control  the  colonies  itself.  To  British  auth- 
orities it  seemed  most  proper  that  the  colonists  should  con- 
tribute to  the  expenses  of  the  empire,  but  the  colonists  were 
not  willing  to  pay  taxes  imposed  upon  them  by  the  parlia- 
ment in  London. 

It  was  undoubtedly  a  situation  with  much  right  and 
wrong  on  both  sides,  in  which  the  quarrel  developed  be- 
cause there  were  properly  two  points  of  view.  The  prin- 
cipal trouble,  doubtless,  was  that  as  yet  no  scheme  had 
been  devised  for  holding  together  the  parts  of  a  widely 
scattered  empire,  in  days  when  no  means  of  rapid  com- 
munication existed.  Accordingly,  the  two  sides  drifted 
farther  apart,  and  presently  the  colonists  acted  together 
against  the  mother  country.    Then  some  whose  discontent 


Colonial  ad- 
ministration 
strengthened 


Board  of 
Trade 


Estrange- 
ment and 
separation 


86 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Indepen- 
dence 


Napoleon 
and  the 
Spanish 
colonies 


Indepen- 
dence 


had  led  to  the  crisis  drew  back,  but  the  more  radical  ele- 
ment got  control  and  the  movement  went  farther  than  was 
expected  at  first.  In  1776  they  declared  independence. 
There  had  been  little  thought  of  such  a  thing  at  the  start, 
and  the  upper  and  more  prosperous  classes  and  most  of  the 
conservative  people  were  opposed  to  it  strongly.  JHad 
Great  Britain  blockaded  the  coast  and  tried  to  exhaust  the 
resources  of  the  revolutionaries,  she  might  probably  have 
driven  them  to  submit;  but  she  rashly  undertook  to  carry 
on  offensive  campaigns  too  far  from  her  base.  Even  so, 
she  would  probably  have  won  in  the  end  had  not  France, 
desiring  revenge,  joined  in  the  contest.  In  1783  the  in- 
dependence of  the  United  States  was  acknowledged,  and 
they  shortly  after,  triumphing  over  difficulties  which 
probably  seemed  as  great  as  the  obstacles  confronting  a 
commonwealth  of  nations  a  hundred  and  thirty  years  later, 
combined  in  a  strong  federal  union. 

The  establishment  by  these  Americans  of  a  government 
which  they  believed  would  secure  them  liberty  was  not 
without  effect  upon  France,  and  was  among  the  causes 
which  led  to  the  French  Revolution  shortly  after.  Then 
came  the  mightiest  changes  that  Europe  had  experienced 
for  ages.  Napoleon  rose  to  power,  and  conquering  much 
of  Europe,  disposed  of  it  as  seemed  to  him  best.  In  the 
spring  of  1808  French  troops  took  possession  of  Spain. 
British  command  of  the  sea  now  separated  Spain  from  her 
colonial  possessions.  During  this  period  the  colonists  in 
Latin  America  had  a  freedom  from  commercial  restrictions 
which  made  them  more  willing  to  follow  the  example  of 
the  United  States,  and  in  the  period  1810-30  one  after 
another  they  gained  their  independence.  The  trade  re- 
strictions had  previously  been  somewhat  relaxed,  but  Spain 
had  still  tried  to  reserve  her  colonial  trade  mostly  for  her- 
self. During  the  Napoleonic  struggle  England  had  got 
a  great  share  of  this  trade  and  she  encouraged  the  colonists 
to  get  their  independence. 


.^c^X^^' 


mm 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA 


37 


The  Latin  Americans  modeled  their  governments  for- 
mally after  that  of  the  United  States.  The  people,  how- 
ever, had  had  little  training  in  self-government,  and  the 
populations  were  not  predominantly  European  but  con- 
tained a  great  number  of  Indians  and  negroes,  so  that  suc- 
cess in  self-government  was  scanty.  •  Nor  were  the  people 
of  Spanish  America  fortunate  in  their  attempts  to  make 
a  great  federal  union.  Distances  were  too  great,  the 
elements  of  discord  too  large  to  be  overcome,  and  the 
combinations  whether  in  Central  America  or  South  Amer- 
ica speedily  broke  up  into  parts. 

The  Americans,  particularly  the  English-speaking  people 
in  the  United  States,  went  forward  in  freer  and  more  splen- 
did development  than  would  have  been  possible  had  the 
connection  continued  as  of  old.  America,  largely  because 
of  magnificent  natural  resources,  became  a  land  of  oppor- 
tunity for  people  from  all  over  Europe,  and  a  haven  for 
the  aspiring  and  oppressed.  The  people  of  the  new  na- 
tions went  on  their  way,  far  from  the  older  world,  glorying 
in  their  isolation  and  superior  goodness.  More  and  more 
they  conceived  of  themselves  as  Americans,  different  from 
the  people  in  Europe. 

There  was  much  truth  in  this,  and  yet  always,  in  a  larger 
way,  America  seemed  as  an  extension,  an  expansion,  of 
Europe.  Fot  it  was  from  the  countries  of  western  Europe, 
from  Spain  and  Portugal,  from  France,  from  England,  and 
to  a  lesser  extent  from  Germany  and  Holland,  that  their 
population  and  culture  had  come  in  the  first  place.  Small 
jealousies  and  points  of  difference  for  a  long  time  caused 
the  ties  with  Europe  to.  be  little  noticed;  but  at  last  the 
strength  of  these  ties  became  evident  enough.  In  the 
period  1914-18  a  great  war  shook  Europe  to  its  very  foun- 
dations. Into  this  war  at  length  came  the  United  States. 
She  knew  she  had  nothing  to  gain  except  saving,  along  with 
some  of  the  nations  of  western  Europe,  the  ideals  and 
the  civilization,  which  long  before  she  had  got  principally 


Government 
in  Latin 
America 


Independent 
development 


American 
culture   fun 
damentally 
European 


38  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

from  England  and  partly  from  France.  It  now  seemed 
that  a  better  world  in  the  future  was  to  be  attained  through 
a  league  of  nations,  which,  however  inclusive  it  might 
afterward  be,  must  at  first  be  founded  by  those  nations  of 
western  Europe  and  the  people  of  the  United  States,  who 
had  so  much  of  ideals  and  civilization  in  common. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Discovery  and  Conquest:  John  Fiske,  The  Discovery  of 
Americay  2  vols.  (1892),  one  of  the  most  fascinating  and  in- 
structive of  historical  narratives;  Sir  Arthur  Helps,  The  Spanish 
Conquest  in  Americay  4  vols.  (ed.  by  M.  Oppenheim,  1900-4), 
the  best. 

Latin  America:  W.  R.  Shepherd,  Laiin  America  (1914); 
E.  G.  Bourne,  Spain  in  America  (volume  III  of  the  Am,€rican 
Nation,  1904),  excellent;  Bernard  Moses,  The  Establishment  of 
Spanish  Rule  in  America  (1898);  R.  G.  Watson,  Spanish  and 
Portuguese  South  America  (1884) ;  A.  Zimmermann,  Die  KoUmial- 
politik  Portugals  und  Spaniens  (1896). 

New  France:  John  Fiske,  New  France  and  New  England 
(1902) ;  R.  G.  Thwaites,  France  in  America^  U97-1763  (volume 
VII  of  The  American  NatioUy  1905);  Francis  Parkman,  The  Old 
RSgim£  in  Canada  (1874). 

The  British  settlements:  C.  M.  Andrews,  The  Colonial 
Period  (1912),  excellent;  Edward  Channing,  History  of  the 
United  StateSy  vols.  I-III  (1905-12),  the  best  general  account; 
volumes  IV-VI  of  The  American  NatioUy  namely,  L.  G.  Tyler, 
England  in  America  (1903),  C.  M.  Andrews,  Colonial  Self  Govern- 
ment (1904),  E.  B.  Greene,  Provincial  America  (1905);  G.  L. 
Beer,  British  Colonial  Policy,  176^-1765  (1907),  Origins  of  Brit- 
ish Colonial  Policyy  1578-1660  (1908),  The  Old  Colonial  System, 
1660-175^^,  2  vols.  (1912) ;  O.  M.  Dickerson,  American  Colonial 
Government,  1696-1765  (1912);  H.  L.  Osgood,  The  American 
Colonies  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  3  vols.  (1904-7)  best  for  the 
development  of  colonial  government  and  institutions;  A.  M. 
Schlesinger,  The  Colonial  Merchants  and  the  American  Revolu- 
tion, 1763-1776  (1918). 

Separation  of  the  British  colonies:  S.  G.  Fisher,  The  Struggle 
for  American  Independencey  2  vols.  (1908);  C.  H.  Van  Tyne, 
The  American  Revolution  (volume  IX  of  The  American  Nation, 
1905),  The  Loyalists  in  the  American  Revolution  (1902). 


COMMUNITIES  IN  AMERICA        39 

Separation  of  the  Latin- American  colonies:  F.  L.  Petre, 
Simon  Bolivar  (1910) ;  Bernard  Moses,  South  America  on  the  Eve 
of  Emancipation  (1908);  F.  L.  Paxson,  The  Independence  of  the 
South  American  Republics  (1903). 

'  For  government:  J.  I.  Rodriguez,  American  Constitutions, 
2  vols.  (1906-8)  which  contains  the  constitutions  in  the  original 
language  and  in  translation. 


CHAPTER    III 
THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

Les  representants  du  peuple  francais  constitu^s    en  assemblee  na- 
tionale     .     .     .     declare     .     .     .     , 

Les  hommes  naissent  et  demeurent  libres  et  egaux  en  droits    .     .     . 

Le  but  de  toute  association  politique  est  la  conservation  des  droits 
•  naturels     ...    la  liberte,  la  propriete,  la  surete  et  la  resistance 
a  I'oppression     .     .     . 

Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man,  September  14,  1791,  Archives 
Parlementaires,  1st.  series,  xxxii.  525. 

You  may  call  this  faction,  which  has  eradicated  the  monarchy, — 
expelled  the  proprietary,  persecuted  religion,  and  trampled  upon 
law, — you  may  call  this  France  if  you  please:  but  of  the  ancient 
France  nothing  remains,  but  its  central  geography;  its  iron  fron- 
tier; its  spirit  of  ambition;  its  audacity  of  enterprise;  its  perplexing 
intrigue. 
Edmund  Burke,  Letters  on  a  Regicide  Peace,  Letter,  ii  (1796). 

The  great  The  great  change  which  began  in  western  Europe  in 

changes  in       1739  jg  known  as  the  Frehch  Revolution.     It  is  one  of  the 

^jjjj^g  four  great  events  in  the  history  of  European  civilization 

^  since  medieval  times.     The  Renaissance  in  the  fifteenth 

and  sixteenth  centuries  brought  increased  perception  of 

beauty  and  the  excellence  of  mankind;  it  broadened  and 

deepened  the  minds  of  a  vast  number  of  men,  and  opened 

up  the  way  for  exploration  of  great  new  realms  of  thought. 

In  the  sixteenth   century   the  Reformation   attacked   a 

religion  which  had  stood  for  hundreds  of  years,  led  to  the 

establishment  of  other  faiths,  and  indirectly  opened  the 

40 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION        41 


way  for  freedom  of  thought  and  Hberty  of  mind.  About 
the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  French  Revolution 
brought  profound  changes  in  social  and  political  affairs, 
sweeping  away  old  institutions,  and  laying  the  foundation 
for  self-government  and  democracy  in  Europe.  About  the 
same  time,  but  much  less  noticed  at  the  start,  alterations 
still  more  profound  began  in  England  with  the  Industrial 
Revolution,  in  industrial  and  social  affairs. 

The  French  Revolution  began  for  reasons  which  are 
quite  clear  now.  Except  for  the  inhabitants  of  Great 
Britain,  the  French  had  risen  to  a  higher  state  and  to 
better  conditions  than  any  other  people  in  Europe.  It  is 
not  among  those  who  are  most  downtrodden  that  revolu- 
tions usually  begin,  unless  the  oppressive  government  is 
completely  overthrown  by  enemies  from  without,  but 
among  those  who  have  got  rid  of  their  worst  grievances, 
and  are  more  impatient  of  those  which  remain.  That  the 
movement  did  not  begin  in  the  British  Isles  is  probably 
because  the  English  people  had  had  their  revolutions  in 
1641  and  1688. 

But  if  the  condition  of  Frenchmen  was  generally  far 
better  than  that  of  the  people  in  German  and  Slavic  lands, 
and  also  Italy  and  Spain,  the  condition  of  many  of  them 
was  grievous  enough.  France  of  the  Old  Regime,  was  a 
land  of  established  privilege  for  a  few  people,  and  of  much 
misery  for  many  of  the  rest.  The  contrast  between  con- 
ditions then  and  now  is  so  great  that  the  student  is  apt  to 
think  the  old  evils  resulted  from  great  tyranny  and  wicked- 
ness of  rulers  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century;  but, 
indeed,  these  conditions  had  come  down  through  a  long 
course  of  centuries  in  tenacious  survival  or  natural  develop- 
ment, and  a  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago  they  existed  al- 
most everywhere  in  the  world. 

In  France,  where  the  population  was  probably  about 
twenty -five  millions,  most  of  the  wealth  and  most  of  the 
power,  the  social  importance  and  most  of  the  political  control 


French  Rev- 
olution and 
Industrial 
Revolution 


Why  the  / 

Revolution 
began  in 
France 


^ 


Conditions 
under  the 

Regime 


Churchmen 
and  nobles 


[ 


42 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Privileges 
of  class 


Bourgeoisie 


Their 
position 


were  in  the  hands  of  the  nobility,  perhaps  a  hundred  thous- 
and in  number,  who  were  at  an  immeasurable  distance 
above  the  rest  of  the  people.  They  monopolized  most  of 
the  high  offices  and  salaries  in  the  state,  in  the  army,  in 
the  Church.  It  has  been  estimated  that  nobility  and 
Church  owned  half  of  the  soil  of  the  kingdom,  and  that  the 
great  mass  of  the  people  paid  to  them  a  fourth  of  all  they 
produced.  They  had  many  special  privileges,  which  had 
come  down  from  feudal  times  but  now  bore  grievously  on 
the  peasants.  Many  of  them  received  from  the  govern- 
ment huge  salaries  for  doing  little  or  nothing.  In  Britain 
also  at  this  time  a  nobility  controlled  the  government  and 
owned  a  great  part  of  the  wealth  and  privilege  of  the  king- 
dom; but  it  was  the  glory  of  the  British  aristocracy  that 
they  were  usually  the  constructive  leaders  of  their  people, 
living  among  their  tenants  on  their  estates  for  part  of  the 
year.  In  France,  however,  the  nobles  were  burdensome 
and  not  so  useful,  since  it  had  for  a  long  time  been  the 
policy  of  the  kings  of  France  to  draw  the  nobles  away  from 
their  districts  and  keep  them  about  the  royal  court  in 
subservience,  magnificence,  and  glory. 

Next  down  in  the  scale  was  the  French  middle  class,  the 
bourgeoisie,  less  numerous  and  important  than  the  middle 
class  in  England  then,  but  greater  than  the  bourgeoisie 
of  any  other  European  coimtry,  and  perhaps  more  impor- 
tant than  the  middle  class  recently  in  Russia.  They  were 
the  merchants  and  traders,  the  manufacturers  or  masters 
in  the  guilds,  the  professional  men,  lawyers,  physicians, 
and  bankers;  altogether  less  than  two  millions,  perhaps. 
They  and  the  members  of  the  upper  class  had  most  of  the 
brains  and  intelligence,  and  most  of  the  capacity  for  leader- 
ship in  the  country.  But  whereas  the  nobles  and  greater 
clergy  were  relaxed  from  possession  of  special  privilege, 
and  were  sinking  deeper  into  sloth  and  splendid  decay,  the 
bourgeoisie  to  some  extent  made  their  position  for  them- 
selves and  kept  it  by  ability  and  hard  work.     They  were 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION        43 


Town 

workers  and 
peasants 


to  be  the  principal  leaders  in  the  revolution  approaching. 
But  they  also  profited  by  special  privilege  and  exclusive 
right.  The  "masters"  of  the  guilds  practically  monopo- 
lized industry  and  trade,  and  were  able  to  avoid  changes 
and  keep  out  the  competition  of  others  who  wanted  to  share 
in  their  profits.  In  France,  as  in  other  Continental  coun- 
tries then,  the  guild  system  lasted  on  long  after  its  useful- 
ness was  over,  still  able  to  prevent  such  changes  as  made 
the  Industrial  Revolution  in  England. 

The  lowest  class  comprised  more  than  nine  tenths  of  all 
the  French  people,  the  peasants,  and  the  workers  in  the 
towns.  The  town  workers  had  no  chance,  as  a  rule,  ever 
to  rise  in  their  trades  or  better  their  condition,  but  lived 
huddled  in  poverty  and  despair.  From  among  them  were 
to  come  some  of  the  wildest  and  most  terrible  of  the  Revo- 
lutionary mobs.  Worse  was  the  state  of  most  of  the  peasan- 
try, engaged  in  agriculture,  almost  all  of  them  on  the 
estates  of  great  lords,  to  whom  they  paid  heavy  rent  and 
many  other  obligations  also.  Serfdom  had  largely  passed 
away  in  France,  though  there  were  still  many  thousands  of 
peasants  partly  unfree,  mostly  in  Alsace  and  Lorraine. 
But  the  French  peasants  had  progressed  upward  more 
slowly  than  their  brethren  in  England.  They  still  owed 
many  manorial  dues  and  obligations.  Crops  must  be  sold 
in  the  lord's  market,  grain  must  be  ground  in  his  mill, 
bread  baked  only  in  his  oven,  and  for  all  this  they  must 
pay  heavy  dues.  In  France  as  elsewhere  the  nobility  had 
the  sole  right  to  hunt  and  kill  game;  the  peasants  must 
assist  them,  but  were  debarred  by  savage  game  laws  from 
mterfering  with  rabbits  or  deer  which  often  fattened  on 
their  crops.  In  some  places  the  peasant  labored  under 
more  restrictions  and  burdens  than  elsewhere,  the  obliga- 
tions varying  according  to  old  local  customs  come  down 
from  the  time  when  France  was  a  country  of  feudal  divi- 
sions. 
\        The  government  of  France  had  long  been  powerful  and    Taxes 


Manorial 
dues 


44 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Poverty 


Misery 


Conditions 

relatively 

good 


ambitious  and  accordingly  its  expenses  were  very  great. 
Its  revenue  was  derived  mostly  from  the  middle  and  the 
lower  classes.  The  clergy  were  largely  exempt  and  many 
of  the  nobles  evaded  paying  taxes.  From  the  peasantry 
most  of  the  taxation  was  wrung,  half  their  income,  some 
have  said.  The  principal  direct  taxes  were  the  taille,  tax 
on  land,  or  in  some  places  a  proportion  of  income,  and  the 
corvSe  or  labor  on  public  works  or  the  highways.  The  land 
tax  was  arbitrarily  assessed  by  the  government  each  year 
generally  as  high  as  the  peasants  could  pay;  and  often  they 
let  their  hovels  go  to  ruin  and  went  about  in  rags,  conceal- 
ing such  possessions  as  they  had,  since,  as  with  the  Irish 
tenants  in  the  nineteenth  century,  any  appearance  of  projS- 
perity  was  apt  to  be  followed  by  an  increase  in  the  pay- 
ments demanded.  About  half  of  the  revenue  was  raised 
by  indirect  taxes,  of  which  the  most  celebrated  was  the 
gabelle  upon  salt.  This  and  other  indirect  taxes  were 
farmed  out  to  speculators,  who  paid  to  the  government  a 
lump  sum,  and  then  tried  to  collect  more  than  that  amount 
for  themselves. 

It  is  easy  to  exaggerate  the  depression  of  the  French 
people.  A  great  many  were  undoubtedly  very  wretched. 
Travellers,  like  Arthur  Young,  the  Englishman,  and 
Frenchmen  like  Rousseau  and  D'Argenson,  have  written 
accounts  of  misery  and  hunger  and  dull  despair,  which 
seem  very  horrible  to  modem  readers  and  make  the 
Revolution  appear  to  have  been  inevitable.  But  it  must 
constantly  be  remembered  that  such  conditions  and  worse 
prevailed  almost  everywhere  then,  and  usually  had  pre- 
vailed for  most  people.  In  the  last  years  of  the  eighteenth 
century  there  were  undoubtedly  many  prosperous  peas- 
ants in  France,  and  the  national  wealth  and  the  population 
seem  to  have  continued  to  increase.  The  government 
had  been  great  and  respected  and  feared  a  long  while, 
and  France  had  scarcely  been  invaded  for  three  hundred 
years.     It  is  true  that  most  of  the  people  had  no  part  in 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION 


45 


the  government;  that  they  paid  heavy  taxes,  were  subject 
to  many  vexatious  restrictions;  that  they  might  be  thrown 
into  prison  without  any  cause  shown,  without  the  remedy 
of  habeas  corpus  which  Englishmen  considered  their  birth- 
right; that  Protestants  were  sent  to  the  galleys  for  heresy; 
that  criminals  were  broken  on  the  wheel  and  left  to  die  in 
lingering  torment:  all  this  is  true;  yet  it  is  very  probable 
that  people  were  happier  and  that  life  and  property  were 
safer  in  France  than  almost  anywhere  else  in  the  world 
then. 

The  upheaval  soon  to  come  was  caused  by  abuses,  not  so 
terrible  as  to  crush  the  spirit  of  the  people,  not  so  great  as 
elsewhere  in  Europe,  but  sufficient  to  make  much  discon- 
tent. But  the  way  was  also  prepared  by  enormous  in- 
tellectual and  moral  changes.  Slowly  and  almost  imper- 
ceptibly there  had  developed  in  the  most  favored  portions 
of  Europe,  and  especially  in  France,  a  larger  measure  of 
humanity  and  kindness,  of  sympathy  and  desire  for  things 
to  be  better;  and  along  with  this  went  a  spirit  of  scepticism, 
a  questioning  of  things  past  and  present,  and  attempts  to 
examine  them  in  the  light  of  reason.  Montesquieu  and 
Voltaire  both  made  a  study  of  laws  and  institutions  in 
France  and  elsewhere;  both  of  them  knew  something  of  the 
English  system;  and  both  hoped  that  there  might  be  en- 
lightened reforms  in  France.  About  the  middle  of  the 
eighteenth  century  Diderot  and  a  group  of  followers  and 
companions  began  publishing  the  monumental  Encyclo- 
pSdie^  in  which  they  attempted  to  sum  up  the  knowledge 
of  their  time,  and  give  to  the  public  the  results  of  new 
science  and  thought  arising  about  them. 

During  the  same  period  Voltaire  became  the  intellectual 
leader  of  Europe.  In  his  numerous  writings,  which  fill 
nearly  a  hundred  volumes,  there  is  not  much  directly 
constructive.  It  was  his  mission  to  attack  and  make 
ridiculous  and  destroy  the  shams,  superstitions,  the  ab- 
surdities, and  the  outworn  things  which  hindered  people 


Causes 
tending 
toward 
change 


Humanitar- 
ianism  and 
reason 


Voltaire 


46 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Rousseau 


Develop- 
ment of 
democratic 
ideas 


and  harassed  them.  His  writing,  like  that  of  the  other 
French  masters  of  this  age,  was  clear  and  simple,  in  ad- 
mirable taste  and  very  attractive;  he  was  one  of  the 
greatest  of  all  the  masters  of  mockery,  satire,  and  biting 
wit.  Everywhere  his  writings  were  read  and  admired. 
For  ages  no  one  had  done  so  much  to  prepare  men  for  the 
sweeping  away  of  existing  obsolete  institutions. 

Of  greater  importance  was  the  work  of  Rousseau.  He 
was  a  man  with  much  weakness,  often  contemptible  in 
character,  yet  of  great  moral  strength  and  intellectual  dar- 
ing. In  the  seventeenth  century  some  Englishmen  had 
taught  the  doctrine  that  men  were  equal  and  should  gov- 
ern themselves.  Their  efforts  soon  failed  and  their  writ- 
ings got  little  attention.  But  their  doctrines  were  taken 
by  Rousseau  and  others  and  stated  with  a  brilliancy  and  an 
earnestness  that  everywhere  attracted  a  following.  "  Man 
was  bom  free,"  he  said;  "he  is  everywhere  now  in 
chains."  Civilization  and  the  government  which  some 
men  had  imposed  on  others  had  in  course  of  time 
reduced  most  people  to  misery  and  subjection.  The 
remedy  was  a  return  to  the  state  of  nature.  All  men 
ought  to  be  free,  and  government  in  the  hands  of  the 
people. 

Rousseau  was  the  first  great  exponent  of  democracy. 
His  ideas  were  studied  and  mildly  approved  by  many  of 
the  upper  classes,  who  believed  that  it  would  be  good  if 
such  things  could  be,  but  who  felt  very  sure  that  they  could 
not.  At  the  same  time,  gradually  reaching  people  in  the 
lower  classes,  his  teachings  excited  strange  stirring  and 
ambition.  Most  persons  of  consequence  then  believed  that 
aristocracy  must  always  exist;  but  more  and  more  people 
now  began  to  dream  in  some  vague  way  that  the  world 
could  be  so  bettered  that  there  might  be  freedom  and 
equality  and  happiness  for  all.  In  America  men  wrote 
Rousseau's  ideas  into  the  Declaration  of  Independence; 
and  in  France  a  few  years  later  they  came  to  be  the  basic 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION 


47 


principles  of  the  French  Revolution.  All  through  the 
nineteenth  century  there  was  steady  growth  of  democracy, 
and  one  of  the  greatest  of  all  the  things  in  that  wonderful 
hundred  years  was  the  effort  to  see  whether  doctrines  of  de- 
mocracy could  be  realized  completely.  During  the  French 
Revolution  a  little  later  men  were  to  reform  things  with 
respect  to  ideas  of  liberty,  fraternity,  and  equality;  but 
after  a  little  while  much  of  their  most  radical  work  would 
be  swept  away  in  reaction.  In  the  United  States  people 
were  to  hold  even  more  steadfastly  to  their  belief  that 
democracy  had  succeeded  completely  and  that  it  would  be 
the  portion  of  European  people  in  happier  times  to  come; 
but  European  thinkers  would  point  out  that  democratic 
success  in  America  was  apparently  owing  in  no  small  part 
to  the  free  land  which  men  might  have  who  desired  it, 
and  that  the  real  test  would  come  in  the  twentieth  century 
when  this  land  had  all  been  taken.  None  the  less  in  1917, 
when  the  United  States  entered  the  Great  War,  her  people 
had  come  to  believe  that  the  struggle  was  a  final  contest 
between  autocratic  and  democratic  systems.  Thus  far  had 
gone  the  old  ideas  which  Rousseau  had  taught  long  before. 

If  there  were  many  things  in  France  of  the  Old  Regime 
which  needed  reform;  if  there  were  brilliant  writers  shaking 
the  faith  of  people  in  that  which  was  old,  or  teaching 
strange,  revolutionary  doctrines,  none  of  these  things 
would  necessarily  have  brought  on  the  French  Revolution. 
As  in  so  many  other  instances,  it  was  an  almost  fortuitous 
combination  of  causes  which  brought  the  result. 

France  saw  the  accession  in  1774  of  Louis  XVI,  a  good 
and  well-meaning  man,  but  irresolute  and  without  ability 
or  force  of  character.  During  his  predecessor's  long  reign 
there  had  been  great  and  fruitless  wars,  much  failure,  and 
frequently  incompetent  administration.  The  old  financial 
system  had  been  slowly  breaking  down,  and  the  country 
long  been  going  toward  bankruptcy,  when  in  1778,  in  order 
to  get  revenge  upon  England  and  curb  her  power,  France 


In  the  nine- 
teenth cen- 
tury 


Revolution 
not  a  neces- 
sary conse- 
quence 


Louis  XVI 


48 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Financial 


The  Etats 
Generaux 
summoned 


Meeting  of 
the  States 
General 


Organization 


undertook  to  assist  the  American  colonies  to  obtain  in- 
dependence. She  won  the  war,  but  she  was  financially 
ruined  for  the  time.  Two  great  French  ministers  and 
masters  of  finance,  Turgot  and  Necker,  had  seen  clearly 
that  only  by  thorough-going  reforms  could  the  monarchy 
become  solvent,  but  the  privileged  classes  had  interfered 
and  caused  their  dismissal.  By  1786  there  was  a  huge 
annual  deficit,  no  additional  taxes  could  be  raised,  and  no 
more  money  could  be  borrowed.  Accordingly,  next  year 
the  king  was  compelled  to  summon  the  Notables,  or  prin- 
cipal ecclesiastics  and  nobles,  but  they  could  give  little 
help,  for  they  were  unwilling  to  pay  any  considerable  share 
of  the  taxes. 

In  the  Middle  Ages,  when  the  English  parliament  was 
developing,  similar  bodies  were  developing  in  France  and 
in  Spain.  In  Spain  they  had  long  since  disappeared,  and 
in  France  the  States  General,  representative  of  the  three 
great  estates  or  classes,  clergy,  nobles,  and  bourgeoisie, 
had  not  been  assembled  since  1614.  In  1788  Louis  XVI 
was  advised  to  have  them  come  and  give  counsel.  There 
was  now  hunger,  discontent,  and  unrest.  Had  a  great 
ruler  guided  the  forces  which  were  about  to  be  moved  in 
France  and  in  western  Europe,  there  might  have  been  sub- 
stantial betterment  and  only  moderate  reform;  but  actually 
this  event  marked  the  end  of  the  Old  Regime. 

May  5,  1789  the  States  General  met  near  the  great 
palace  of  Versailles,  and  listened  to  a  speech  from  the  king. 
A  fourth  of  the  members  were  nobles,  a  fourth  the  clergy, 
and  half  represented  the  towns,  in  the  Third  Estate.  The 
delegates,  especially  in  the  Third  Estate,  brought  with 
them  cahiers,  or  reports,  which  recounted  evils  and  de- 
manded reforms,  many  of  these  cahiers  reflecting  the  spirit 
of  recent  radical  teaching. 

According  to  ancient  practice  the  three  orders  voted 
separately  as  bodies,  so  that  the  privileged  upper  classes 
always  had  the  majority  in  their  two  orders.     But  now 


fjiMi^^ 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION        49 

there  was  current  the  contention  that  States  General  should 
sit  as  one  body,  the  members  voting  individually  and  rep- 
resenting the  nation.     This  might  result  in  the  nobles  and 
the  higher  clergy  being  in  the  minority,  and  they  for  the 
most  part  opposed  it.     A  bitter  struggle  began.     On  June 
17th  the  Third  Estate  proclaimed  that  the  orders  should 
organize  as  a  national  assembly,  and  soon  after  they  were     A  National 
joined  by  the  lower  clergy  and  a  few  of  the  liberal  nobles.     Assembly 
Then  the  king  prepared  to  interfere;  whereupon  the  gath- 
ering followed  Mirabeau  and  Sieyes,  their  leaders,  to  a 
neighboring  tenniS-court  where  they  solemnly  swore  that — 
as  members  of  the  National  Assembly  they  would  not 
separate  till  they  had  written  a  constitution  for  France. 
After  this  the  nobles  and  upper  clergy  came  to  sit  with  them. 

Troops  were  now  assembled  about  Versailles,  and  it  The  mob  in 
seemed  that  the  National  Assembly  might  be  overawed  ^"^^ 
or  dismissed.  Suddenly  the  mob  rose  in  Paris,  and,  after 
wild  disorder  and  looting,  forced  the  surrender  of  the 
Bastille,  the  old  state  prison,  in  the  eyes  of  the  people  the 
very  symbol  of  the  Ancien  Regime,  While  the  Bastille 
was  being  destroyed  the  people  of  Paris  set  up  a  commune 
in  the  city,  in  which  the  government  was  put  in  the  hands 
of  representatives  elected  by  the  people  of  the  different 
districts.  They  enrolled  a  citizen  militia,  the  National 
Guard,  and  it  was  evident  that  a  powerful  champion  had 
arisen  to  defend  the  Assembly. 

For  a  time  the  king  acquiesced,  but  soon  there  was  fur-     Paris  saves 
ther  plotting  to  dismiss  the  Assembly.     Rumors  of  this     *^e  National 
came  to  Paris,  and  on  October  5th,  a  terrible  and  uncouth     ^^^^"^"^y 
mob  went  streaming  forth  to  Versailles.     During  the  wild 
night  that  followed,  the  royal  family  was  saved  by  Lafayette 
and  the  National  Guard,  but  next  day  the  mob  and  the 
Guard  returned  to  the  city  bringing  the  king  and    his 
family,  and  shortly  after  the  Assembly  followed    them. 
The  National  Assembly  was  now  sitting  in  the  midst  of 
the  most  radical  of  the  people  of  France. 


50 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Disorders  in 
the  country 


Work  of  the 

National 

Assembly 


Reforms 


Meanwhile  the  old  order  was  perishing  in  France.  The 
mass  of  the  people,  rude  and  ignorant,  hoped  that  the 
States  General  would  amend  all  wrongs,  and  believed  that 
all  things  for  their  betterment  were  possible.  Disorders 
and  discontent  soon  broke  out,  and  in  the  provinces  ad- 
ministration and  government  came  to  a  standstill.  The 
peasants  rose  up  and  drove  out  the  lords  or  their  stewards 
and  sacked  the  magnificent  chdteaux.  Monasteries  were 
plundered,  officials  driven  away.  In  blind  wrath  the 
people  began  at  once  to  pull  down  all  the  institutions  which 
seemed  to  them  hateful  and  oppressive. 

Until  the  spring  of  1789  the  government  of  France  had 
been  vested  entirely  in  the  king  and  his  subordinate  officials 
and  councils.  During  the  summer  the  Estates  General, 
led  by  the  Third  Estate,  became  the  National  Assembly  of 
France,  and  proposed  to  reform  old  abuses  and  make  a 
new  constitution.  Like  the  Long  Parliament  of  1640  in 
England,  they  meant  to  effect  great  changes  and  make 
thorough-going  reforms,  but  they  were  for  the  present  led 
by  comparatively  moderate  men,  who  desired  no  absolute 
break  with  the  existing  order  of  things.  As  was  the  case 
with  the  great  parliament  in  England,  the  work  now  first 
done  was  the  best,  the  wisest,  and  most  lasting.  Some 
of  the  great  reforms  begun  in  the  period  1789-91  were 
destined  to  endure  permanently  for  the  good  of 
France. 

In  August  1789,  after  the  uprisings  in  the  country,  the 
National  Assembly  abolished  serfdom,  and  provided  for 
the  abolition  of  all  the  feudal  or  manorial  payments  and 
obligations,  a  work  completed  four  years  later.  In  No- 
vember, the  Church  property  was  confiscated,  and  a  little 
later  the  monasteries  were  suppressed,  thus  taking  from 
the  Church,  which  was  one  of  the  greatest  and  firmest 
supports  of  the  old  order,  its  vast  possessions  comprising 
about  a  fifth  of  the  soil  of  the  kingdom.  The  property 
thus  secularized  was  used  as  security  upon  which  to  issue 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION        51 


the  paper  money,  or  assignats,  which  were  the  basis  of 
revolutionary  finance.  Another  great  change  was  made 
in  proclaiming  complete  religious  freedom;  and  in  August 
1790  the  clergy  were  taken  from  the  control  of  the  Pope, 
made  subject  to  the  state,  which  was  to  pay  their  salaries, 
and  their  election  provided  for  by  the  people.  This  ec- 
clesiastical legislation  was  carried  through  by  the  en- 
lightened sceptics,  disciples  of  Voltaire  and  others  like  him, 
who  controlled  the  Assembly;  but  it  soon  produced  a  great 
gulf  between  two  sections  of  the  people  in  France.  The 
Pope  protested  against  the  taking  of  Church  property  and 
making  the  clergy  a  civil  body.  He  forbade  Catholics  to 
obey  the  decrees;  and  the  priests,  who  at  the  start  had 
assisted  so  greatly  in  forwarding  the  Revolution,  now 
began  to  oppose  it,  and  to  influence  the  peasants  against  it. 
The  Revolution  prevailed,  and  in  France  the  Church  never 
was  restored  to  the  position  it  held  before  1789;  but 
when  the  Revolutionary  days  were  past  the  clergy  and  the 
religious  orders  long  continued  to  support  as  much  of  the 
older  order  as  they  could. 

Many  of  the  nobles  had  by  this  time  left  France,  and  as 
Emigres  in  foreign  courts  were  striving  to  get  foreign  inter- 
vention. Meanwhile  the  Assembly  went  on  with  reforms 
and  the  task  of  writing  a  constitution.  Often  there  was 
the  utmost  difficulty.  The  National  Guard  controlled 
Paris,  but  mobs  frequently  made  their  influence  felt. 
Inside  the  chamber  the  Assembly  was  already  divided  into 
political  parties:  the  very  conservative,  known  as  the 
Right  from  the  part  of  the  hall  where  they  sat,  and  the 
very  radical,  the  Left,  disciples  of  Rousseau;  between  them 
the  more  important  bodies  of  the  Center,  who  wanted  the 
monarchy  preserved,  though  limited  by  a  written  constitu- 
tion. Some  of  them  would  have  restricted  power  to  the 
Wealthy  and  upper  class,  some  would  have  extended  it  to 
the  middle  class,  but  not  to  the  mass  of  the  poor.  In  the 
center  sat  Lafayette,  and  Si^yes,  and  Mirabeau.    But  while 


Church  and 
state 


Parties 
within  the 
Assembly 


52 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


PoUtical 

Clubs 


The  Consti- 
tution of 
1791 


Declaration 
of  Rights 


The  new 
government 
of  France 


liberals  and  moderate  conservatives  controlled  the  body 
drawing  up  the  constitution,  and  while  the  extremists  were 
a  small  minority  there,  outside  the  Assembly  political 
bodies  or  Clubs  were  growing  up,  of  which  the  Jacobins 
were  most  famous,  by  means  of  which  the  radicals  pres- 
ently swayed  the  multitude,  and  began  to  intimidate  the 
members  of  the  Assembly.  In  the  spring  of  1791  Mira- 
beau  died,  and  with  him  passed  away  the  greatest  mod- 
erate leader  of  the  Revolution.  The  king,  terrified  now 
by  the  Paris  mobs  and  influenced  by  old  associations, 
resolved  to  flee  from  the  city  to  his  friends.  He  was  easily 
brought  back,  and  the  radicals  and  populace  would  have 
had  him  put  from  the  throne,  but  the  National  Guard  of 
the  middle  class  prevented  it,  and  in  September  presented 
to  Louis  the  new  constitution,  which  he  swore  to  uphold. 

The  Constitution  of  1791  was  the  first  written  constitu- 
tion of  importance  which  any  European  nation  had  ever 
got,  and  with  the  exception  of  the  one  adopted  by  the 
American  states  (1787-9),  the  first  one  of  importance  in 
the  world.  The  preamble,  the  Declaration  of  Rights,  had 
been  drawn  up  some  time  before.  Like  the  writings  of 
Rousseau  and  the  American  Declaration  of  Independence 
it  asserted  that  "Men  are  born  in  equal  rights  and  remain 
so";  and  that  law,  which  should  express  the  will  of  the 
people,  must  be  made  by  the  people  and  be  the  same  for 
them  all.  It  proclaimed  freedom  of  religion,  freedom  of 
speech,  freedom  of  the  press.  It  declared  that  no  one 
should  be  arrested  or  imprisoned  except  in  accordance  with 
the  law.  Thus  at  a  stroke  it  attempted  to  assert  for  the 
French  people  those  privileges  which  had  so  slowly  grown 
up  in  England  and  been  so  zealously  defended  in  America, 
and  more  than  that  it  carried  France  forward  further  than 
any  people  so  far  had  been  taken. 

The  constitution  gave  the  principal  power  of  the  central 
government  to  a  legislative  assembly,  of  one  chamber, 
elected  for  two  years  froni  men  of  property,  by  indirect 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION 


53 


election.  The  franchise,  given  to  about  three  fourths  of 
the  men,  was  restricted  to  those  who  paid  a  certain  amount 
of  taxes.  Actually  this  was  a  very  wide  extension  of  the 
right  to  vote,  for  nowhere  in  the  world  then  was  the  fran- 
chise given  to  all  the  people  or  all  of  the  men.  The  king 
was  not  to  dismiss  the  assembly,  nor  prevent  that  body 
from  passing  laws,  though  he  had  a  temporary  veto,  and 
he  had  no  control  over  local  government,  army,  or  navy. 
Thus  the  executive  was  too  weak.  Local  government 
had  already  been  reformed.  The  old,  overlapping,  and 
confused  divisions  of  France  were  done  away  with,  along 
with  the  surviving  remnants  of  provincial  governments 
which  had  existed  in  them  from  older  times,  and  instead 
now  the  country  was  divided  into  departments,  which 
were  divided  into  smaller  subdivisions,  arrondissements, 
cantons,  and  communes,  which  continue  to  exist  in  France 
at  present.  In  these  districts  local  government  was  estab- 
lished, consisting  of  representatives  and  officials  elected 
by  the  people.  Far  too  much  power  was  vested  in  these 
local  bodies,  and  this  change  did  not  endure. 

This  system  of  limited  constitutional  monarchy  in  place 
of  absolutism,  and  power  of  bourgeoisie  and  upper  classes 
instead  of  the  nobles  alone,  lasted  less  than  two  years. 
On  the  one  hand  it  was  detested  by  those  who  loved 
the  old  order,  while  on  the  other  hand  it  fell  far  short  of 
satisfying  the  radicals,  who  wanted  more  drastic  changes, 
and  a  great  body  of  the  lower  classes  whose  economic 
condition  was  not  yet  bettered  and  who  were  excluded  from 
any  real  control.  The  moderate  leaders  who  had  so  far 
guided  reform  had  believed  that  it  would  be  well  for 
France  to  have  limited  monarchy  similar  to  that  of  Great 
Britain;  but  now  there  arose  teachers,  like  Marat,  who  pro- 
claimed that  England  was  ruled  by  an  upper  class,  that 
this  was  not  what  the  French  people  should  try  to  attain, 
and  like  Danton  and  Robespierre,  who  yearned  to  estab- 
lish a  real  democracy,  with  government  and  power  vested 


Local 
government 


Weakness  of 
the  new  con- 
stitutional 
system 


The 
radicals 


54 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The 
Jacobins 


The  Legisla- 
tive Assem- 
bly 


Hostility 
abrbad 


in  all  of  the  people.  They  and  men  like  them  worked 
ceaselessly  in  their  Clubs,  stirred  up  the  proletariat  of  Paris, 
published  newspapers  and  pamphlets  which  spread  wide 
the  new  thoughts  and  radical  ideas,  and  carried  on  corres- 
pondence with  men  of  like  mind  in  the  other  cities  of 
France.  Foremost  of  these  organizations  in  Paris  was  the 
club  of  the  Jacobins,  which  had  established  branches  in 
most  of  the  towns  of  France.  In  the  confusion  which 
presently  arose  they  were  seen  to  have  not  merely  the 
ablest  and  most  daring  leaders,  but  the  only  well-organized 
political  machinery  in  France;  and,  just  as  long  afterward 
happened  in  Russia,  they  soon  got  disproportionate 
strength,  and  presently  supreme  power  in  the  country. 

The  Legislative  Assembly,  elected  in  1791  under  the  new 
constitution  contained  few  members  of  political  experience 
or  statesmanlike  ability,  for  the  leaders  who  had  just 
drafted  the  constitution  were  declared  not  eligible  for 
election.  Only  a  minority  of  the  members  were  ardent 
supporters  of  the  new  constitution.  Presently  the  ma- 
jority of  the  members  followed  the  lead  of  the  Girondists, 
whose  leaders  came  from  the  Department  of  the  Gironde, 
who  represented  the  radical  feeling  of  the  country  rather 
than  of  the  capital,  many  of  whom  wished  to  establish  a 
republic.  More  extreme  than  they  were  the  Jacobin 
members,  known  as  the  "Mountain,"  from  the  higher  seats 
where  they  sat  in  the  chamber,  who  expressed  the  radical 
feeling  of  Paris,  and  hoped  for  a  democracy  in  France. 

The  EmigrSs  abroad  were  preparing  expeditions  to  return 
and  win  back  the  things  they  had  lost,  while  the  sovereigns 
of  the  old  monarchies  and  empires  of  Europe  looked  with 
dismay  upon  what  seemed  to  them  wild  and  monstrous  up- 
heaval in  France,  which  might,  if  not  checked  soon,  spread 
abroad  to  their  lands  also.  Foremost  in  desiring  to  inter- 
vene was  Leopold  II,  of  Austria,  Emperor  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire.  He  was  brother  of  Marie  Antoinette, 
Louis's  queen,  and  champion  of  absolutism  and  divine 


I 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION         55 


right.  August  1791,  the  Emperor  and  the  King  of  Prussia 
•Issued  the  Declaration  of  Pillnitz,  proclaiming  that  it  was 
the  common  interest  of  European  sovereigns  to  restore 
what  the  Revolutionists  had  overthrown.  This  aroused 
vast  indignation  in  France;  and  in  the  passion  and  confu- 
sion that  followed,  the  Girondists  got  control  of  the  gov- 
ernment. They  felt  that  safety  of  the  reforms  just  won, 
and  hope  of  getting  further  amendment,  depended  upon 
resisting  the  interference  of  foreign  kings,  and  so  they  were 
eager  to  take  up  arms.  In  this  they  were  supported  by  the 
moderate  upholders  of  the  constitution  who  believed  that 
a  successful  war  would  firmly  establish  the  new  system. 
A  great  wave  of  emotion  swept  over  the  country.  Men 
took  up  weapons  and  hastened  toward  the  frontier,  and 
began  to  sing  the  new  Marseillaise  as  they  went. 

But  the  French  were  ill-prepared  for  a  war^  and  dis- 
couraging failures  followed.  The  royal  family  was  in 
^pecret  communication  with  the  enemy  and  hoping  for  the 
invaders'  success.  In  July  1792  the  Duke  of  Brunswick, 
leader  of  the  allied  invading  armies,  issued  a  manifesto, 
declaring  that  he  came  to  end  the  anarchy  and  restore  the 
king,  and  he  threatened  Paris  with  destruction  if  the 
royal  family  were  harmed.  In  August  the  mob  of  Paris 
rose  in  violent  insurrection  and  the  constitutional  govern- 
ment was  overthrown.  The  Commune  of  Paris,  controlled 
by  the  bourgeoisie,  was  supplanted  by  a  commune  based 
upon  the  mass  of  the  people.  The  king  sought  refuge  with 
the  Assembly  in  terror  for  his  life,  and  many  of  the  Assem- 
bly fled  from  Paris.  The  remaining  members  now  voted 
to  suspend  the  king  from  his  office  and  declared  that  a 
National  Convention  should  at  once  be  elected  by  man- 
hood suffrage  to  draft  a  new  constitution.  For  some  days 
anarchy  reigned.  All  the  while  the  invaders  were  pressing 
on  into  the  country.  The  frontier  fortresses  fell  and  the 
invaders  pushed  on  for  Paris.  Then  began  the  horrible 
September  massacres  of  the  Royalists  in  Paris,  for  the 


Declaration 
of  Pillnitz 


The   French 
defeated 


The  Com- 
mune of 
Paris 


86 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Valmy,  1792 


The 

National 
Convention 
1792-5 

The  new 
order 


The  Repub- 
lic  triumph- 
ant and 
aggressive 


Feeling 
abroad 


deliberate  purpose  of  striking  terror  into  the  hearts  of 
enemies  and  traitors.  Amidst  shocking  brutality  som# 
hundreds  of  the  best-born  people  in  Paris  were  put  to 
death. 

But  the  tide  now  turned.  The  Prussians  were  defeated 
at  Valmy,  in  what  was  only  a  skirmish,  yet  in  its  effects 
one  of  the  decisive  battles  in  European  history.  "From 
this  day  commences  a  new  era,"  wrote  Goethe  who  was 
present  on  the  field.  It  was  felt  now  that  France  was 
saved  and  with  it  also  the  Revolution.  In  the  midst  of 
enormous  enthusiasm  the  leaders  went  forward  to  new 
changes.  On  the  day  of  the  battle  the  National  Conven- 
tion assembled.  The  members  resolved  to  make  a  com- 
plete new  beginning  of  things.  September  22,  1792  was 
to  be  the  beginning  of  the  Year  I  of  a  new  age.  France 
was  to  be  a  republic.  The  king  was  deposed,  imprisoned 
later  put  on  trial,  and  in  1793  put  to  death.  The  Emigres 
were  banished  for  ever  from  France.  ^ 

Meanwhile  the  Prussians  soon  lost  interest  in  the  cam- 
paign, and  the  Austrians  fought  with  no  success.  France 
was  cleared  of  foes,  and  a  republican  army  entering  the 
Austrian  Netherlands  was  welcomed  by  the  people  and 
quickly  drove  the  Austrians  out.  The  French  people, 
wild  with  enthusiasm,  now  believed  that  they  could  carry 
the  benefits  of  their  revolution  to  the  oppressed  people 
of  all  the  countries  of  Europe.  In  December  1792  the 
National  Convention  announced  that  it  would  treat  as 
enemies  any  people  who  submitted  to  princes  or  privileged 
classes,  but  would  fight  to  the  end  to  establish  in  other 
lands  equality  and  government  by  the  people.  Thus  did 
the  radicals  and  revolutionaries  boldly  challenge  the  old 
order  in  Europe,  and  rouse  up  against  themselves  one  of 
the  most  powerful  combinations  ever  brought  upon 
France.  In  England  some  had  greatly  sympathized  with 
the  Revolution  at  first,  and  in  the  Low  Countries,  along 
the  Rhine,  and  in  Italy  some  of  the  inhabitants  yearned 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION 


57 


for  the  things  which  the  French  revolutionists  had  won; 
j»ut  all  the  established  governments,  most  of  the  people  of 
Europe,  and  many  in  France,  not  only  regarded  the  Revo- 
lution as  hateful,  but  saw  it  as  a  very  dangerous  thing  to 
be  stamped  out  before  it  spread  farther.  The  execution 
of  Louis  XVI  filled  with  horror  and  aversion  the  upper 
classes  and  the  conservative  people  of  Europe,  at  the  same 
time  that  formidable  insurrections  broke  out  in  France 
itself.  In  1793  a  powerful  coalition  was  formed  of  Austria 
and  Prussia,  already  at  war  with  France,  and  Great  Britain, 
Spain,  Holland,  and  the  north  Italian  state.  Savoy. 
Frenchmen  were  driven  out  of  Belgium  and  the  Rhine 
country,  and  the  enemy  again  threatened  to  march  on 
Paris. 

France  and  the  Revolution  were  saved  by  splendid  and 
suddenly  provided  military  organization  and  by  the  grand- 
est outburst  of  national  feeling  which  any  people  had 
^hown  since  the  Romans  made  war  upon  Hannibal.  The 
spirit  of  nationality  had  its  beginning  on  a  grand  scale 
in  France  during  the  dangers  of  Revolutionary  times. 
Nationalism  means  the  consciousness  felt  by  people  that 
they  are  bound  together  by  common  ties  and  interests, 
which  make  them  a  distinct  group  compared  with  other 
peoples.  Often  it  is  based  on  common  language;  some- 
times on  racial  characteristics,  common  religion  and  ideals; 
sometimes  on  enthusiasm  and  feeling  which  can  scarce  be 
explained.  One  of  the  most  difficult  things  to  arouse, 
when  created  it  is  one  of  the  most  powerful  of  all  the  feel- 
ings which  can  actuate  large  numbers  of  men. 

In  antiquity  people  were  held  together  by  family  or 
tribal  ties,  which  can  only  bind  a  small  number,  or  else  by 
force  from  above  in  the  old  empires  which  so  easily  fell  to 
pieces.  The  vast  and  long-enduring  Roman  Empire  did 
in  the  end  make  many  of  its  people  feel  that  they  were 
bound  together  by  the  tie  of  being  Roman  citizens,  but 
after  the  fall  of  the  Empire  western  Europe  all  through  the 


Nationalism 


In  earlier 
times 


58 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Nations 


The  Revolu- 
tion and  na- 
tional feeling 


Middle  Ages  was  divided  into  small  feudal  districts,  or 
larger  jurisdictions  held  together  in  groups  by  force  at  the^ 
top.  The  history  of  England  all  through  the  Anglo-Saxon 
period  (449-1066)  is  the  story  of  efforts,  largely  unsuccess- 
ful, to  make  the  inhabitants  of  the  different  parts  feel  that 
they  were  Englishmen,  members  of  one  state.  In  Ireland 
this  was  not  accomplished.  Italy,  the  Germanics,  Russia, 
all  failed  until  very  late  to  achieve  unity  and  feeling  of 
common  interest,  and  Poland  has  only  just  attained  it. 

The  people  of  England,  France,  Spain,  and  some  other 
lands  had  got  unity  and  strength  by  the  end  of  medieval 
times,  and  had  so  strong  a  feeling  of  common  interest  that 
nations  appeared  to  have  arisen.  At  first  the  word  nation 
had  denoted  merely  a  group  bound  together  by  family  tie, 
(nati,  to  be  born).  In  medieval  days  it  seems  to  have 
been  used  to  designate  groups  of  university  students  who 
came  from  the  same  district  or  country.  Gradually  it 
was  given  to  all  the  people  of  a  single  state;  but  it  could^ 
not  yet  connote  the  strength  and  feeling  which  later  cir- 
cumstances were  to  give  it.  In  the  sixteenth,  seventeenth, 
and  eighteenth  centuries  the  people  in  France,  Spain,  or 
England  had  for  the  most  part  no  share  in  government  or 
the  better  things  of  life.  They  were  ruled  by  upper  classes 
or  centralized  governments.  They  could  not  in  the  nature 
of  things  have  the  feeling  of  mexi  who  themselves  took  part 
and  had  interest  in  the  rule  of  the  state. 

In  1793  many  of  the  French  people  became  conscious 
for  the  first  time  that  they  were  the  state.  Now  they 
could  be  roused  to  defend  the  new  order  which  had  given 
them  so  much;  and  could  be  made  to  rise  up  with  an  en- 
thusiasm never  before  shown  by  the  mass  of  the  people  of 
any  large  country.  When  the  invaders  closed  in  on  their 
land,  they  sprang  forward  in  great  bodies  to  hurl  them 
back,  and  there  was  a  wild  spirit  of  exuberance  and  power 
which  people  had  not  felt  before.  That  is  what  gives  such 
enormous  importance  to  the  rally  of  the  French  people  in 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION 


59 


1793;  it  was  a  movement  of  the  people  themselves,  act- 
uated by  a  new  and  more  real  consciousness  of  national 
feeling.  For  the  first  time  was  this  force  unloosed  in 
Europe,  and  it  was  destined  to  overturn  the  old  order.  It 
was  about  to  defeat  all  its  enemies  and  save  the  Revolu- 
tion; it  was  the  basis  of  the  greatness  of  France  when  Na- 
poleon came  to  power.  When  the  same  spirit  was  still 
later  aroused  in  the  hearts  of  Spaniards  and  Russians  and 
Germans,  Napoleon  was  finally  to  be  defeated.  During 
the  nineteenth  century  nationality  made  a  united  Italy 
and  a  united  Germany.  At  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth 
century  it  was  exaggerated  and  developed  until  it  became 
one  of  the  potent,  indirect  causes  of  the  War  of  the  Nations. 

But  it  was  not  merely  the  e;nthusiasm  of  national  feeling 
which  saved  France  from  her  enemies  now.  Before  1789 
the  French  had  had  the  best  military  organization  and  the 
ablest  military  teachers  in  Europe.  They  now  had  the 
old  organization  and  the  old  tradition  to  build  on.  More- 
ever,  they  had  in  Carnot,  one  of  the  Jacobin  radicals,  a 
great  genius  for  military  administration.  He  and  his 
associates  planned  campaigns,  provided  materials  of  war, 
and  raised  huge  republican  national  armies,  which  pres- 
ently by  sheer  weight  of  numbers  and  because  of  the  fiery 
ardor  of  their  spirit  overwhelmed  all  the  enemies  who 
opposed  them.  France  was  cleared  of  the  foe,  and  again 
the  Republicans  went  beyond  the  frontiers.  In  a  short 
time  Frenchmen  had  occupied  territory  as  far  as  the  Rhine 
and  got  for  France  the  "natural"  frontiers  which  her 
statesmen  and  generals  during  centuries  had  striven  to 
obtain. 

All  this  was  accomplished  while  France  seemed  in  danger 
of  falling  to  pieces.  There  was  a  great  revolt  of  Catholics 
and  Conservatives  in  La  Vendee,  in  the  west.  Moreover 
the  Girondists,  who  at  first  controlled  the  Convention, 
were  overthrown  by  force;  then  the  Jacobins  getting  con- 
trol proceeded  to  far  more  radical  and  democratic  reforms. 


Nationalism 
in  the 
nineteenth 
century 


Military 
organization 


Revolts 
France 


m 


60 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  Reign  of 

Terror, 

1793-4 


Effects    of 
the    Terror 


Motives   of 
the   agents 


The  result  was  that  numerous  revolts  broke  out  in  the 
provinces,  where  people  were  not  willing  to  suffer  the  dic- 
tation of  Paris  or  go  as  far  as  the  Jacobins  wished.  Tou- 
lon, the  great  Mediterranean  naval  base,  received  a  British 
fleet,  and  there  were  insurrections  in  Marseilles,  Lyons, 
Nantes,  Bordeaux,  and  other  places.  But  all  this  was 
relentlessly  crushed.  The  Jacobins  in  the  Convention 
established  a  marvellously  strong  and  efficient  central 
government,  and  undertook  deliberately  to  stamp  out  all 
treason  and  disaffection  by  terror  and  force.  A  Com- 
mittee of  Public  Safety  including  Carnot,  Robespierre,  and 
others,  took  supreme  control  of  affairs,  and  the  period 
from  the  summer  of  1793  to  that  of  the  next  year  was 
afterward  known  as  the  Reign  of  Terror.  In  Paris  the 
queen,  all  the  nobles  who  could  be  reached,  and  all  others 
suspected  of  disaffection,  were  beheaded  by  the  guillotine, 
which  had  just  been  invented.  Toulon  was  recaptured, 
and  the  rebellion  stamped  out  in  the  other  places.  Fear- 
ful vengeance  was  taken.  At  Nantes  boatloads  of  vic- 
tims were  sunk  in  the  Loire,  and  decree  went  forth  that 
Lyons  should  be  razed  to  the  ground.  Altogether  many 
thousands  of  excellent  people  and  high-born  victims  per- 
ished; and  the  Jacobins  earned  for  themselves  that  terrible 
and  hateful  renown  which  is  still,  after  more  than  a  hun- 
dred years,  so  strongly  associated  with  them. 

It  was  afterward  as  easy  to  praise  them  and  apologize 
as  now  it  is  to  advocate  the  leaders  in  Russia.  There  is 
no  doubt  that  the  best  of  the  Jacobins  sincerely  wished  to 
destroy  old  abuses  and  better  the  conditions  of  the  masses. 
Marat  and  Danton  were  as  filled  with  zeal  for  the  people 
as  Nicolai  Lenine  was  for  the  proletariat  in  1920.  Robes- 
pierre yearned  to  bring  to  pass  all  the  teachings  of  Rous- 
seau as  Trotzky  worked  for  extremest  socialist  doctrines. 
Carrier,  who  drowned  the  prisoners  at  Nantes,  Collot  and 
Fouche  who  mowed  down  the  victims  at  Lyons  with  grape- 
shot,  Freron  at  Toulon,  and  Le  Bon  at  Cambrai,  whatever 


.^mk 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION 


61 


delight  they  took  in  this  butchery,  could  all  believe,  and 
cause  others  afterward  to  repeat,  that  they  took  the  short- 
est way  to  accomplish  good  ends.  It  is  true  that  few  people 
thus  lost  their  lives  in  comparison  with  the  unnumbered 
victims  of  great  wars.  Yet  it  is  a  sound  instinct  which 
causes  men's  minds  to  dwell  much  upon  the  destruction  of 
the  most  prominent  and  highest.  If  it  be  said  that  it  was 
really  the  most  merciful  way  to  end  the  divisions  and  re- 
volts in  France,  it  must  be  remembered  also  that  such 
reasoning  was  used  by  the  Germans  in  Belgium  and  north- 
ern France,  and  the  Bolsheviki  in  Russia.  Louis  Blanc, 
the  socialist,  afterward  wrote:  "It  is  a  falsehood  to  say 
that  the  Terror  saved  France,  it  may  be  affirmed  that  it 
crippled  the  Revolution." 

France  was  saved  from  foreign  invasion,  and  the  Jaco- 
bins proceeded  to  establish  a  new  democratic  order. 
Supported  by  the  workingmen  of  Paris,  they  had  deposed 
the  Girondists  in  May  1793,  and  afterward  put  the  leaders 
to  death.  But  the  Jacobin  leaders  themselves,  one  after 
another,  came  to  untimely  end.  In  July  a  young  woman 
stabbed  Marat  to  death.  Robespierre  was  now  leader 
of  the  Convention  and  the  Committee.  On  the  one  hand 
he  overthrew  Hebert,  who  led  the  Paris  Commune  and 
wished  to  establish  atheism  and  divide  property  among  all 
the  people;  but  on  the  other  he  sent  Danton  to  the  guillo- 
tine because  he  advised  moderation  and  a  return  to  earlier 
conditions.  For  a  short  time  in  1794  Robespierre  was 
virtually  dictator  of  France.  He  reopened  the  churches, 
which  had  been  closed,  and  laid  magnificent  plans  for  the 
extension  of  education  and  democracy  among  the  people. 
But  these  plans  he  meant  to  carry  through,  swiftly  and 
despite  all  opposition,  by  relentless  employment  of  Terror, 
and  a  great  number  of  people  were  brought  to  their  death. 
Actually  now  a  reaction  was  beginning,  and  the  more  mod- 
erate members  of  the  Convention,  who  disapproved  his 
policy  and  at  the  same  time  trembled  for  their  safety,  sud- 


Jacobins 
control  the 
Convention 


Robespierre 


Reaction 


62  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

denly  got  control  of  aflFairs,  and  put  him  to  death.  So  ended 
the  Reign  of  Terror,  in  July  1794.  Then  the  Convention 
proceeded  to  finish  its  constructive  work,  which  in  after 
days  came  to  be  seen  as  the  most  important  work  that  it  did. 
Reforms  The  Constituent  Assembly,  1789-91,  representing  the 

made  by  the  bourgeois  interests,  had  destroyed  the  old  privileges  of 
Convention  aristocracy,  and  given  political  rights  to  most  of  the 
people.  The  work  of  the  National  Convention,  1792-5, 
was  mostly  in  the  interests  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people, 
the  lower  classes,  having  to  do  principally  with  social 
and  economic  affairs.  As  the  property  of  the  Church  had 
been  taken  already,  so  now  the  lands  of  the  emigrant  nobles 
were  confiscated  by  the  state,  and  sold.  At  first  they 
passed  largely  into  the  hands  of  speculators  and  a  new 
body  of  large  proprietors  who  were  rising  in  the  confusion 
of  the  time,  but  after  a  while  they  were  bought  in  small 
The  peas-  holdings  by  the  peasants.  Vast  results  came  from  this, 
ants  and  the  For  centuries  the  tendency  in  Europe  had  been  for  the 
consolidation  of  holdings  into  large  estates.  In  the  new 
world  there  was  a  notable  exception:  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  with  much  free  land,  became  a  nation  in 
which  a  great  number  of  men  owned  their  own  farms. 
In  France  even  before  1789  some  of  the  land  was  being 
acquired  in  small  holdings  by  the  peasants;  now  after  the 
beginning  of  the  Revolution,  a  great  deal  more  came  into 
the  possession  of  thrifty  peasants,  who  presently  became 
the  very  backbone  of  the  nation  and  the  basis  of  its  great- 
ness in  the  nineteenth  century.  Thereafter  they  were 
the  main  conservative  part  of  the  nation.  In  1789  they 
had  risen  up  in  wild  rebellion  against  their  lords;  but  the 
feudal  burdens  had  been  removed  by  the  National  Assem- 
bly, and  in  the  following  years  they  began  getting  the 
ownership  of  the  land  which  they  worked.  After  that 
radicalism  was  confined  to  the  cities.  So  long  as  it 
seemed  to  the  peasants  ihsit  Emigres  or  reactionaries  might 
undo  the  Revolutionary  work  and  cause  them  to  lose  their 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION 


63 


land-holdings  the  peasants  supported  or  endured  the  ad- 
ministration of  Danton  and  Robespierre,  just  as  in  1919 
the  Russian  peasants  rallied  to  some  extent  in  support  of 
the  Bolsheviki.  But  the  French  country  people  soon 
turned  away  from  the  radicalism  of  Paris,  and  welcomed 
the  more  conservative  rule  of  the  Directory  and  the  se- 
curity which  Napoleon  gave.  The  socialist  schemes  of  the 
Paris  workingmen  in  1848  and  the  communism  of  Paris  in 
1871  were  overthrown  largely  because  of  the  hostility  of 
the  small  proprietors  in  the  country. 

A  scheme  of  national  education  was  prepared,  as  well 
as  a  plan  for  making  a  uniform  code  or  collection  of  the 
laws,  which  later  on  led  to  the  free  public  school  system 
which  has  been  built  up  in  France,  and  to  Napoleon's 
celebrated  Code.  At  this  time  also  the  Metric  System  was 
adopted.  Furthermore,  certain  great  principles  were 
established,  that  there  should  be  no  slavery,  that  children 
should  inherit  almost  equally  from  their  parents,  and  that 
men  should  not  be  imprisoned  for  debt.  The  extremists  did 
in  addition  try  to  bring  to  pass  many  strange  and  absurd 
things  which  involved  a  complete  break  with  the  sentiment 
and  tradition  of  the  past.  All  this  inevitably  soon  came  to 
an  end  and  was  afterward  remembered  only  with  derision. 

Meanwhile,  the  reaction,  already  perceptible,  con- 
tinued. After  Robespierre,  the  Convention  came  pres- 
ently under  control  of  the  bourgeoisie  again.  A  new 
constitution  was  drafted,  and  became  effective  in  1795. 
According  to  this  Constitution  of  the  Year  III  the  execu- 
tive was  to  be  the  Directory,  a  committee  of  five,  chosen 
by  the  legislature.  The  legislative  consisted  of  two 
houses  chosen  by  electors  with  property  qualifications. 
Against  this  government  the  National  Guard  of  Paris 
rose  in  the  insurrection  of  the  Thirteenth  VendSmiaire, 
but  was  easily  dispersed.  The  Directory,  the  government 
of  the  new  middle-class  republic,  endured  for  four  years. 
During  this  time  France  endeavored  to  hold  off  her  enemies 


Reforms 
begun 


Extremist 
proposals 


Constitution 
of  the  Year 
III 


The 

Directory, 

1795-1799 


64 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Eighteenth 
Bnunaire 


The  work  of 
the  Revolu- 
tion    secure 


The  great 
results 


and  complete  the  work  of  reconstruction.  At  last  in  1799 
by  the  Coup  d'Etat,  or  sudden  stroke  of  state,  of  Brumaire 
18th  and  19th,  it  was  overthrown  by  Napoleon  Bonaparte 
and  those  ajssociated  with  him. 

Often  it  has  been  said  that  the  French  Revolution  now 
came  to  an  end.  It  did  not  seem  so  at  the  time,  and  mod- 
em scholars  declare  that  Napoleon  and  his  associates 
saved  it  from  reaction  and  destruction,  and  made  possible 
carrying  it  forward  still  further.  The  days  of  extreme 
social  radicalism  and  the  Terror  had  come  definitely  to  an 
end,  and  already  many  of  the  most  extreme  changes  had 
been  undone.  But  the  best  work  of  the  Revolution  was 
secure.  The  worst  abuses  and  obsolete  things  of  the  Old 
Regime  had  been  permanently  ended.  Liberty,  fraternity, 
and  equality,  the  watchwords  of  the  reformers,  had  been 
given  to  a  great  many  of  the  people  of  France  in  larger 
measure  than  ever  before  in  the  history  of  the  world. 
Against  a  host  of  enemies  the  Revolutionists  had  made 
their  cause  good  and  saved  their  work.  Bloodshed,  vio- 
lence, and  horrible  deeds  had  been  done,  but  these  things, 
if  the  most  spectacular  and  longest  remembered,  were  in 
the  end  seen  to  be  the  least  of  the  work  of  the  reformers. 
However  mistaken  some  of  their  methods  and  ideals,  they 
had  honestly  worked  for  the  good  of  the  mass  of  the 
people.  That  some  of  their  work  was  impossible,  and 
much  of  it  too  radical  and  far  in  advance  of  the  time,  and 
so  destined  soon  to  be  overthrown  by  natural  reaction,  is 
evident.  But  they  had  brought  about  enormous  gains 
for  the  middle  and  lower  classes  in  France;  their  work 
would  be  carried  into  all  lands  adjacent  and  leave  perma- 
nent results  there;  they  would  serve  for  ages  as  an  encour- 
agement and  a  hope  for  men  everywhere  who  wished  for 
things  better.  The  effects  of  the  American  Revolution, 
great  as  they  were,  are  not  to  be  compared  with  those  of 
the  movement  in  France.  The  one  took  place  among  a 
few  millions  of  people  far  away  on  the  world's  frontier, 


THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION        65 

^'  .  . 

the  other  in  the  midst  of  the  most  populous  of  the  highly- 
civilized  nations,  in  the  center  of  the  world's  affairs.  The 
French  Revolution,  which  was  the  most  important  event 
in  Europe  in  the  eighteenth  century,  was  also  one  of  the 
greatest  events  in  the  history  of  civilized  men. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY  " 

The  causes  of  the  Revolution:  E.  J.  Lowell,  The  Eve  of  the 
French  Revolution  (1892) ;  Arthur  Young,  Travels  in  France  and 
Italy  during  the  Years  1787, 1788,  and  1789  (numerous  editions). 
For  more  extended  study :  Aime  Cherest,  La  Chute  de  VAncien 
Regime,  1787-1789,  3  vols.  (1884-6);  Charles  Gomel,  Les  Causes 
Financieres  de  la  RSvolution  Frangaise,  2  vols.  (1892-3) ;  Maxime 
Kovalevsky,  La  France  Economique  et  Sociale  a  la  Veille  de  la 
Revolution,  2  vols.  (1909-11),  excellent;  Merrick  Whitcomb, 
Typical  Cahiers  of  1789  (Translations  and  Reprints  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Pennsylvania,  1898).  For  the  great  writers  who  assisted 
and  interpreted  the  changes:  John  (Viscount)  Morley,  Diderot 
and  the  Encyclopaedists,  2  vols.  (1891),  Voltaire  (1903),  Critical 
Miscellanies,  4  vols.  (1892-1908);  Arthur  Chuquet,  J.  J.  Rous- 
seau (1901);  and  some  of  the  writings  themselves,  as  Montes- 
quieu, De  r Esprit  des  Lois  (1748),  Rousseau,  Contrat  Social 
(1762),  Voltaire,  Dictionnaire  Philosophique  (1764). 

The  Revolution:  the  best  of  the  shorter  works  is  Louis  Made- 
lin.  La  Revolution  (1911),  trans.  The  French  Revolution  (1916); 
H.  E.  Bourne,  The  Revolutionary  Period  in  Europe  {17 68-1815) 
(1914);  J.  H.  Rose,  The  Revolutionary  and  Napoleonic  Era, 
1789-1815  (1898);  H.  M.  Stephens,  A  History  of  the  French 
Revolution,  2  vols.  (1886-91). 

Of  longer  works  the  best  is  Alphonse  Aulard,  Histoire  Poli- 
tique de  la  Revolution  Frangaise,  1789-180J^,  (3d  ed.  1905), 
trans,  by  Bernard  Miall,  4  vols.  (1910) ;  Albert  Sorel,  VEurope 
et  la  Revolution  Frangaise,  8  vols.  (1885-1904);  Heinrich  von 
Sybel,  Geschichte  der  Revolutionzeit  von  1789,  5  vols.  (3d  ed. 
1865-79),  trans,  by  W.  C.  Perry,  4  vols.  (1867-9). 

For  laws  and  constitutions :  L.  G.  W.  Legg,  Select  Documents 
Illustrative  of  the  French  Revolution,  2  vols.  (1905);  Henri  Mon- 
nier,  Les  Constitutions  et  les  Principales  Lois  Politiques  de  la 
France  depuis  1789  (1898);  Leon  Cahen  and  Raymond  Guyot, 
VCEuvre  Legislative  de  la  Revolution  (1913),  best  on  the  subject. 
Of  the  sources  there  are  two  great  collections:    Archives  Parle- 


66  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

mentaires  de  1787  h  1860:  Recueil  Complet  des  Dihats  LSgislatifs 
et  Politiques  des  Chambres  Frangaises,  127  vols.  (2d  ed.  1879- 
1913),  covering  the  period  1787  to  1839;  and  P.  J.  B.  Buchez 
and  P.  C.  Roux-Lavergne,  Histoire  Parlementaire  de  la  RSvolu- 
tion  FrangaisCy  1789-18 15 y  40  vols.  (1834-8),  containing  extracts 
from  debates,  newspapers,  and  pamphlets  of  the  time;  also  Le 
MoniteuTy  32  vols,  (reprint  of  the  most  important  newspaper). 

For  the  Jacobins:  A.  Aulard,  La  SociSte  des  JacobinSy  6  vols. 
(1889-97),  a  collection  of  documents. 

The  Reign  of  Terror:  H.  A.  Wallon,  La  TerreuVy  2  vols. 
(1881),  Les  ReprSsentants  du  Peuple  en  Missioriy  5  vols.  (1889- 
90),  Le  Tribunal  RSvolutionairey  2  vols.  (1900). 

Contemporary  accounts:  the  memoirs  of  Bailly,  Madame 
Campan,  Ferrieres,  Comte  de  Fersen,  Lafayette,  Mallet  de  Pan, 
and  Malouet;  Edmund  Burke,  Reflections  on  the  Revolution  in 
France  (1790),  conservative  but  wise,  and  still  the  best  com- 
mentary on  the  work  of  the  National  Assembly;  Thomas  Paine, 
The  Rights  of  Man  (1791-2);  Gouverneur  Morris,  Diary  and 
Letter Sy  2  vols.  (1888). 

Biographies:  E.  B.  Bax,  Babeuf  (1911);  J.  F.  E.  Robinet, 
Condorcet  (1893);  L.  Madelin,  Danton  (1914);  Jules  Claretie, 
Camille  Desmoulins  (1875),  trans.;  A.  Chuquet,  Dumouriez 
(1914);  Bernard  Malley,  Mallet  du  Pan  and  the  French  Revolu- 
tion (1902);  F.  M.  Fling,  The  Youth  of  Mirabeau  (1908);  Louis 
Barthou,  Mirabeau  (1913);  H.  Belloc,  Robespierre  (1901). 

The  wars  of  the  Revolution:  A.  Chuquet,  Les  Guerres  de  la 
Revolutiony  11  vols.  (1886-96),  to  1793;  A.  T.  Mahan,  The  In- 
fluence of  Sea  Power  upon  the  French  Revolution  and  EmpirCy 
1793-1812y  2  vols,  (several  editions). 

The  church:  A.  Debidour,  Histoire  des  Rapports  de  VEglise 
et  de  VEtat  en  France  de  1789  a  1870  (1898);  Pierre  de  la  Gorce, 
Histoire  Religieuse  de  la  Revolution  FranqaisCy  vols.  I,  II  (1909- 
12),  for  the  period  1789-93;  Paul  Pisani,  VEglise  de  Paris  et  la 
Revolutiouy  4  vols.  (1908-11). 

Republicanism:  H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  The  Republican  Tradition 
in  Europe  (1911). 

For  the  history  of  France  in  this  and  subsequent  periods,  the 
student  should  always  have  in  mind  for  further  reference  His- 
tmre  SocialistCy  1789-1900  (ed.  by  Jean  Jaures),  12  vols.  (1901- 
9),  the  different  volumes  written  by  prominent  French  socialists. 


.# 


I 


CHAPTER    IV 
NAPOLEON 

Nous  sommes  maitres  du  monde. 

Napoleon  to  Roederer,  December  1,  1800. 

.  .  .  would  sink  me  in  final  despair  of  ever  living  to  see  pros- 
perity or  liberty  again  in  any  part  of  Europe.  .  .  .  the  mili- 
tary empire  might  last  ages,  before  its  discipline  degenerated;  and 
ages  more  of  darkness  and  idleness  might  protract  the  shame  and 
misery  of  Europe." 
Letter  of  Francis  Horner  to  James  Loch,  July  8,  1808. 

Sur  un  ecueil  battu  par  la  vague  plaintive, 

Le  nautonier,  de  loin,  voit  blanchir  sur  la  rive 
Un  tombeau  pres  du  bord  par  les  flots  depose; 

Ici  git     .     .     .     point  de  nom!  demandez  a  la  terre! 

Ce  nom,  il  est  inscrit  en  sanglant  caractere 
Des  bords  du  Tanais  au  sommet  du  Cedar.     .     .     . 

Lamartine,  "Bonaparte,"  Secondes  MSditations  PoStiques  (1848) 

In  1769  Corsica,  a  mountainous  island  south  of  France,     The  rise  of 
west  from  the  Italian  coast,  long  subject  to  Genoa,  but     Napoleon 
inhabited  by  Italian-speaking  people  who  ardently  wanted       ®°^P^  ® 
Independence,  became  a  possession  of  France.     A  little 
later  that  year  was  born  there  Napoleon  Bonaparte  (1769- 
1821).     His  people  were  of  good  standing  in  the  island  and 
of  noble  descent;  his  mother  a  woman  of  strong  character 
and  remarkable  ability.     The  boy  was  precocious  and  early 
showed  promise  of  unusual  qualities.     He  was  sent  to 
France  for  military  education,  and  just  before  the  Revolu- 
tion he  was  sub-lieutenant  in  an  artillery  regiment.     He 
first  gained  distinction  at  Toulon  in  1793,  when  his  saga- 
city led  to  the  capture  of  a  dominating  height  and  the 

67 


68 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


France 
against  the 
First 
Coalition 


Napoleon's 
Italian  cam- 
paign, 1797 


f/^ 


withdrawal  of  the  British  fleet.  He  became  more  important 
two  years  later  when  he  took  part  in  dispersing  the  crowd 
which  had  risen  to  overthrow  the  Convention.  In  1796  he 
made  an  advantageous  marriage,  and  about  the  same  time 
was  appointed  to  command  the  French  armies  in  Italy. 

War  was  still  going  on  with  England,  Austria  and  Sar- 
dinia (Savoy).  The  French  had  occupied  Belgium,  Ger- 
man territory  to  the  Rhine,  and  Nice  and  Savoy  in  the 
south.  Spain  and  Prussia  had  given  up  the  conflict; 
Russia  was  far  off  and  occupied  with  other  affairs.  But 
it  was  probable  that  England  would  not  make  peace  while 
Belgium  was  in  French  possession,  nor  Austria  while 
France  kept  her  Netherlands  and  retained  German  and 
Italian  territory  which  she  considered  herself  bound  to 
protect.  The  Directory  found  it  no  easy  task  to  reduce 
such  powerful  foes.  England  could  not  be  reached,  but 
they  planned  to  attack  Austria  by  sending  an  army  over 
the  Rhine  through  the  south  German  lands,  while  a  second 
force  was  to  defeat  the  Austrians  in  Italy  and  then  strike 
northeastward  toward  Vienna.  The  latter  plan  was  sug- 
gested by  Napoleon  himself. 

The  efforts  to  crush  Austria  by  crossing  the  Rhine  came 
to  nothing;  but  meanwhile  the  young  commander,  infusing 
wondrous  spirit  into  his  republican  soldiers,  and  at  once 
getting  the  respect  and  loyal  assistance  of  the  older  generals 
beneath  him,  took  his  force  into  northwest  Italy,  and,  estab- 
Jishing  his  communications  firmly,  moved  on  against  the 
Au^triaalorces.  The  campaign  which  followed  is  one 
of  the  classics  of  military  art,  and  one  of  Napoleon's  fore- 
most achievements.  He  laid  siege  to  Mantua,  the  great 
fortress  which  was  the  base  of  Austrians  power.  Four 
times  did  Austrian  armies  try  to^relieve^it  With  superior 
forces.  Each  time,  moving  with  marvellous  rapidity  and 
superb  judgment,  he  caught  the  hostile  armies  divided,  and 
defeated  the  parts  with  his  superior  numbers,  imtil  at  last 
Mantua  surrendered.     Then  the  French,  after  arranging 


.-jitrvt/iVTita:  -v-ff 


niqm3 


1 


Empire  of  Napoleon 
(Direct  Rule) 
lUlim  Empire  of  Napoleon 
llllllll  (Dependent  States) 

rriyryrn      AllieS  Of 

li '•'■'•  •■•'■I   Napoleon 


KINGDOM  \         I 
^  OF         '         ' 

SARDINA 


^M  ED  J  T  ERRAN  E 


S.    EUIi 


•/.\iyF  WARSA" 

^^    V^:---^^V::^Vieiiiiaiv:;;::vV>:v-X^  "^-v 

^^lf^^8S$8$^  :•  ^;^/ hVuVn.-g-a- r".y  :•>: ' :  •  :\'/''' 
fiTiJ^"^°^'^^  ;^-  •'•'"•'*  '•'•*■•'  •* '  ■''•"."*  *'■ '''  •'■•  "• . 


NAPOLEON 


matters  in  Italy  to  suit  them,  crossed  the  mountains  into 
Austrian  territory,  and  soon  came  within  a  hundred  miles 
of  Vienna.  In  October  1797  the  Peace  of  ^mpo-Formio 
was  made.  France  kept  Belgium  and  organized  part  of 
north  Italy  as  a  republic;  in  exchange  Bonaparte  gave  to 
the  Austrians  the  old  and  independent  state  of  Venice. 
The  war  on  the  continent  thus  came  to  a  close.  Except 
for  England  the  great  coalition  had  been  dissolved  by  vic- 
torious France.  Her  "natural"  frontiers  had  been  estab- 
lished, and  she  had  partly  displaced  Austria  as  dominant 
power  in  the  Italian  peninsula. 

In  the  next  few  years  Bonaparte  was  to  establish  his 
reputation  as  one  of  the  greatest  of  all  generals  and  one 
of  the  most  eminent  rulers  and  administrators  in  the  annals 
of  the  world.  He  was  small  of  stature,  pale  of  counte- 
nance, not  handsome,  but  with  splendid  forehead,  nose, 
and  mouth,  and  with  eyes  that  looked  into  the  depths  of 
things  and  awed  the  souls  of  men.  He  had  marvellous 
strength  of  intellect,  vast  will-power  and  force  of  character. 
He  was  possessed  of  amazing  endurance,  could  do  with 
little  sleep,  and  quickly  accomplish  results  which  took  or- 
dinary people  a  long  time.  He  was  infinitely  laborious 
and  careful  and  able  to  get  entire  mastery  of  great  masses 
of  detail;  but  he  had  in  addition  those  qualities  of  mind 
by  which  some  men  read  the  heart  of  a  matter  and  know 
the  real  meaning  of  things.  While  not  without  passion 
and  emotion,  he  lived  much  in  a  world  of  his  own,  apart 
from  and  above  ordinary  men  and  the  morality  and  the 
law  which  ruled  them.  He  regarded  himself  as  superior 
to  mankind,  and  could  play  with  the  lives  and  destinies  of 
innumerable  men,  without  thought  of  their  sufferings  or 
desire,  intent  only  on  the  grand  schemes  which  he  had  in 
his  mind.  He  was  a  wonderful  organizer  and  administra- 
tor, great  in  civil  affairs  and  in  matters  of  government  and 
law;  but  it  was  by  means  of  his  military  greatness  that 
he  raised  himself,   and  it  was  always  because  of  his  ex- 


Treaty  of 

Campo- 

Formio 


Bonaparte's 
appearance 
and 
character 


Superiority 

and 

aloofness 


70 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Military 
greatness 


Develop- 
ment of  the 
art  of  war 


In  the  eigh- 
teenth cen- 
tury 


ploits  in  war  that  he  was  best  known  to  the  men  of  his 
time. 

Bonaparte's  military  eminence  arose  from  clearly  under- 
standing and  first  making  useof  new  factors  which  had  slow- 
ly developed  in  the  art  of  war.  He  did  not  himself  originate 
vast  changes  in  military  art ;  nor  did  he,  like  Julius  Caesar,  in- 
vent new  methods  and  devices  for  the  different  crises  which 
developed ;  so  that  in  the  end  when  his  enemies  had  mastered 
his  methods,  they  overpowered  him  with  superior  resources. 

Military  methods  and  devices  had  long  been  changing. 
In  the  sixteenth  century  slow  moving  bodies  of  infantry, 
armed  with  pikes,  and  cavalry  made  up  the  armies.  Dur- 
ing the  seventeenth  century  cavalry  long  continued  to  be 
the  principal  force,  though  infantry  was  always  indispens- 
able; but  at  last  infantry  came  to  be  the  more  important 
arm  of  the  two.  By  that  time  foot  soldiers  fought  with 
firearms,  but  these  weapons  were  clumsy  and  slowly  dis- 
charged, and  artillery  was  unwieldy  and  ineffective. 
Therefore  armies  marched  slowly;  maneuvers  were  de- 
liberate; strategy  was  usually  cautious;  the  forces  were 
drawn  up  in  intricate  and  difficult  arrangement;  battles 
were  often  indecisive;  and  wars  long  drawn  out.  During 
the  eighteenth  century  a  series  of  changes  was  bringing 
about  fundamental  alteration.  Firearms  were  so  per- 
fected that  a  shot  could  be  fired  a  minute,  and  later  on 
field  artillery  was  made  much  lighter  and  far  more  effec- 
tive. The  result  of  this  was  that  whereas  formerly  all 
parts  of  the  army  had  been  kept  close  together  in  one  great 
body  for  protection,  since  the  musketeers  of  Wallenstein's 
time  with  their  ineffective  muskets  had  to  be  protected 
from  charging  cavalry  by  dense  masses  of  pikemen,  now 
it  was  found  that  smaller  bodies  of  infantry  with  their 
much  more  deadly  guns  could  protect  themselves  or  safely 
retreat  from  superior  numbers,  while  artillery  assumed 
an  importance  in  offence  never  known  before. 

In  all  of  these  changes  Frenchmen  led  the  way;  and  by 


NAPOLEON 


71 


the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  French  military 
writers  were  advising,  what  some  commanders  were  try- 
ing, that  the  old  solid  formations  be  broken  up  into  smaller 
bodies  to  be  moved  more  easily  and  quickly;  that  the  old, 
slow,  indecisive  campaigns  give  way  to  rapid,  daring,  de- 
cisive action ;  that  armies  live  on  the  country  rather  than 
go  slowly  in  order  to  be  accompanied  by  great  supply 
trains;  and  that  campaigns  be  won  by  strategy,  by  effec- 
tive movements  and  combination,  rather  than  the  older 
device  of  slowly  bringing  up  cumbersome  forces.  All  of 
these  things  had  been  done  by  the  Prussian  commander^ 
Frederick  the  Great;  for  the  most  part,  however,  the  old 
system  lingered  on  among  the  commanders.  But  Bona- 
parte grasped  clearly  the  enormous  importance  of  artillery, 
he  understood  thoroughly  the  possibilities  of  infantry 
equipped  with  the  modern  arms,  he  studied  the  campaigns 
of  the  great  captains,  and  mastered  and  elaborated  their 
plans.  Hejmderstood  and  applied  the  old  and  unchanging 
principles  of  strategy:  to  strike  with  superior  force  at  the 
enemy  where  he  is  weakest,  or  to  hold  a  position  with  in- 
ferior force  while  a  crushing  attack  was  being  prepared  for 
the  enemy's  flank  or  rear.  He  moved  so  rapidly  that  he 
could  bring  masses  of  men  over  different  routes  and  con- 
centrate them  in  overwhelming  force  upon  an  enemy  who 
scarcely  believed  that  his  presence  was  possible.  In  the 
greater  campaigns  he  was  wont  to  leave  tactics  and  local 
arrangements  to  subordinates,  he  himself  working  out  the 
splendid  moves  and  vast  combinations  of  which  great 
strategy  consists.  He  was,  in  short,  heir  to  the  military 
excellence  of  France  under  the  Old  Regime  and  to  the  im- 
provements which  Frenchmen  and  others  had  long  been 
working  out;  and  he  used  this  inheritance  with  the  meth- 
ods of  the  great  captains  and  with  the  skill  of  a  genius. 

But  there  were  other  things  too  which  enabled  him  in 
the  course  of  the  next  few  years  to  build  up  an  empire  that 
threatened  to  subdue  all  of  Europe.     He  was  heir  to  the 


Frenchmen 
and  military 
art 


Bonaparte 


Assisted  by 
the  spirit  of 
the  Revolu- 
tion 


72 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


French  Revolution  also.  That  change  had  swept  away 
old  encumbrances  from  France,  aroused  within  her  people 
intense  loyalty  and  national  spirit,  and  given  to  them  an  al- 
most unconquerable  enthusiasm  and  ardor.  Against  him 
were  the  old  monarchies  and  empires,  still  clinging  to  out- 
worn methods,  with  people  not  roused  by  any  strong 
national  spirit,  and  often  without  much  spirit  of  resistance. 
When  the  Revolution  had  spent  its  force,  and  when  Na- 
poleon had  established  despotic  rule,  when  nationality  and 
patriotism  and  desire  for  a  new  order  of  their  own  had  been 
put  into  the  hearts  of  other  peoples  also,  then  they  rose  to 
make  themselves  free  and  Napoleon  was  soon  overthrown. 

In  1798,  after  Austria  had  yielded,  Bonaparte  struck  an 
indirect  blow  at  England.  The  Directory  allowed  him  to 
take  a  powerful  army  to  Egypt  in  order  to  conquer  that 
country  and  then  aim  a  stroke  at  India  beyond.  His 
great  fleet  of  transports  crossed  the  length  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean, just  missed  by  the  British  fleet  under  Nelson,  and 
his  army  overran  Egypt  with  ease.  But  Nelson  returned, 
and  the  French  fleet  was  destroyed  at  Aboukir,  in  the 
Battle  of  the  Nile.  With  communications  completely 
severed  now.  Napoleon  gained  further  triumphs  with 
dwindling  forces;  but  knowing  that  all  chance  of  real 
success  was  gone,  he  abandoned  his  army  and  returned  to 
France.  There  people  thought  more  of  the  glory  of  his 
deeds  than  the  failure  of  his  expedition,  and  he  continued 
to  be  the  most  popular  person  in  the  Republic. 

The  Directory  was  not  able  to  steer  the  state  through 
the  diflSculties  of  the  troublous  time.  There  were  royalists 
who  wished  to  restore  monarchy,  and  radicals  who  wished 
to  equalize  wealth  and  abolish  poverty.  Finances  were 
dishonestly  managed  and  corrupt  politicians  amassed 
sudden  wealth,  while  the  wars  took  great  sums  of  money, 
until  presently  the  issues  of  paper  money  became  so  vast 
as  to  make  the  paper  worthless,  and  the  state  was  bank- 
rupt.    Moreover,  the  policy  of  extending  the  power  of 


NAPOLEON 


73 


France  and  the  Influence  of  the  Revolution  was  continued. 
Along  the  frontiers  of  France,  from  Holland  down  through 
Switzerland  and  on  into  Italy,  was  founded  a  series  of  re- 
publics, modelled  on  France  and  allied  with  her,  so  that 
again  the  fears  and  dislike  of  the  great  powers  were  aroused. 
In J799  the  Second  Coalition  was  formed,  consisting  of 
Great  Britain,  Austria,  Russjax-^id  lesser  states.  That 
year  the  Coalition  was  almost  everywhere  triumphant, 
and  when  Bonaparte  returned  the  French  had  been 
driven  from  Italy  and  the  dependent  republics  had  fallen 
to  pieces.  France  was  defeated  and  seemingly  at  the 
end  of  her  resources.  For  the  feeble  Directory  now  the 
people  had  only  contempt.  Therefore,  in  November 
Napoleon,  supported  by  troops,  easily  overthrew  it  by 
a  coup  d'etat.  He  and  two  men  controlled  by  him  were 
appointed  consuls  and  given  the  task  pf„makiiag.  a  new 
constitution. 

Then  he  struck  the  enemies  abroad.  A  powerful  army 
under  Moreau  crossed  the  Rhine  and  won  the  great  battle 
of  Hohenlinden  in  Bavaria.  Meanwhile  Bonaparte  had 
descended  into  Italy  again  and  overwhelmed  the  Austrians 
at  Marengo,  one  of  the  most  splendid  of  his  triumphs. 
Accordingly,  Austria  made  the  peace  of  Luneville  early  in 
1801.  She  recognized  the  French  conquests  in  Belgium 
and  along  the  Rhine,  as  well  as  the  dependent  republics. 
Russia  also  dropped  out  of  the  war,  and  on  the  continent 
the  Coalition  now  dissolved.  Great  Britain,  left  alone, 
could  not  greatly  harm  France,  and  the  French  could  not 
attack  the  English  until  they  had  built  up  a  powerful  new 
fleet.  Both  sides  were  weary  of  the  conflict.  So,  early 
in  1802j^  peace  was  made  by  the  Treaty  of  Amiens,  by 
which  England  gave  up  many  of  the  conquests  she  had 
made  in  the  colonies,  while  France  made  some  small  con- 
cessions. The  arrangement  was  not  satisfactory,  and  was 
afterward  seen  to  have  given  merely  a  breathing-spell 
while  a  mightier  duel  was  prepared  for. 


T^fi__|econd 

Coalition 

overthrown 


Treaty  of 
Amiens 


74 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Constitution 
of  the  Year 

vm 


Financial 

reforms 


Meanwhile  in  1800,  the  Constitution  of  the  Year  VIII 
had  been  put  into  effect.  A  strong  government  was 
erected.  The  executive  was  vested  in  a  First  Consul 
assisted  by  two  others.  The  First  Consul  was  not  only  at 
the  head  of  administrative  work,  foreign  affairs,  and  the 
army,  but  he  was  in  effect  to  initiate  legislation  as  well, 
and  appoint  all  the  principal  oflScials.  The  legislative 
branch  was  only  a  shadow.  There  was  to  be  manhood 
suffrage,  but  the  voters  were  to  choose  one  tenth  of  their 
number,  who  were  to  choose  a  tenth  of  themselves,  and 
those  so  chosen  were  then  to  choose  a  tenth;  by  which  time 
there  would  be  some  five  thousand  "National  Notables" 
chosen  indirectly  out  of  the  5,000,000  Frenchmen  who  had 
the  franchise.  From  the  list  thus  obtained  a  senate, 
appointed  by  the  First  Consul,  was  to  choose  members  of 
two  lower  branches,  a  tribunate  and  a  legislative  body. 
Actually,  the  legislature  was  to  consist  of  four  parts:  a 
council  of  state  to  prepare  legislation  proposed  by  the 
executive;  a  tribunate  to  discuss;  a  legislative  body 
to  vote  thereupon;  and  a  senate  with  power  of  veto. 
As  a  result  of  this  arrangement  Bonaparte,  the  First  Cori^ 
sul,  became  almost  complete  master  of  France.  Local  self=^^^ 
government,  which  had  been  established  by  the  Constitu--. 
tion  of  1791,  but  which  made  administration  less  effective, 
was  now  made  entirely  subordina.te  to  the  central  author- 
ity; for  all  the  local  executives  were  to  be  appointed  by  the 
First  Consul.  The  result  was  an  exceedingly  eflScient  gov- 
ernment, but  Frenchmen,  who  had  been  attempting  to  estab- 
lish self-government,  and  who  had  first  to  learn  it  really  in 
the  smaller  units  where  they  lived,  now  lost  the  opportunity 
to  put  it  on  a  firm  and  real  foundation  in  their  local  affairs. 

In  the  midst  of  the  war  Bonaparte  had  turned  to  great 
constructive  tasks,  in  some  of  which  he  completed  the 
work  of  the  French  Revolution,  while  in  others  he  estab- 
lished firmly  his  despotic  rule.  The  finances,  whose  evil 
condition  had  done  so  much  to  make  possible  the  Revolu- 


NAPOLEON 


75 


tion  and  afterward  brought  the  Directory  to  its  end,  were 
put  on  a  sound  basis;  expenditures  were  reduced,  care  and 
economy  practised,  and  in  1800  the  Bank  of  France 
founded  to  be  the  center  of  French  finance.  Next  year, 
after  most  skilful  negotiation,  an  arrangement,  or  concor- 
dat, was  made  between  the  Pope  and  the  Republic,  the 
Pope  concurring  in  the  suppression  of  the  monasteries  and 
the  taking  of  Church  property,  Bonaparte  agreeing  that 
the  priests  should  be  paid  by  the  state;  the  priests  were  to 
be  appointed  by  the  bishops,  the  bishops  being  appointed 
by  the  state  but  confirmed  by  the  Pope.  B^this.  Cimcor-^ 
dat  of  1801,  which  lasted  until  1905,  the  Catholic  Church 
in  France  became  a  subordinate  part  of  the  government 
of  the  land. 

Important  also  was  the  codification  of  the  law.  Under 
the  Old  Regime  there  had  been  many  legal  systems  in  dif- 
ferent parts  of  France,  discrepant  and  confusing.  There 
were,  moreover,  numerous  laws,  many  of  them  now  ob- 
solete. It  was  very  desirable  to  reduce  what  was  best  and 
most  important  into  one  collection,  simple  enough  to  be 
easily  used  and  understood,  and  uniform  for  all  the  country. 
This  had  been  undertaken  in  the  time  of  the  Convention; 
now  it  was  carried  forward  to  completion.  With  the  help 
of  legal  experts  and  advisers  Napoleon  mastered  the  sub- 
ject himself,  and  impelled  them  on  to  reduce  to  simple 
form  the  vast  mass  of  detail,  so  that  in  four  months  the 
thing  was  largely  done.  In  1804  appeared  the  Civil  Code, 
which  was  afterward  followed  by  others.  Altogether  they 
are  known  as  the  Code  NapolSon.  They  were  not  only 
simple  enough  to  be  easily  used  and  useful,  but  attractive 
in  form.  Based  on  the  Civil  Law  of  Rome,  which  had  been 
the  foundation  of  the  French  legal  system,  they  embodied 
also  much  of  the  best  work  of  the  Revolution,  such  as 
equality  of  inheritance  and  equality  before  the  law,  arrest 
only  for  cause,  trial  by  jury,  and  personal  freedom. 
Sanctity  of  private  property,   power  of  the  father,  in- 


The  Concor- 
dat of  1801 
with  Rome 


The  law 


Code 
Napoleon 


76 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Education 


Internal  im- 
provements 


The  position 
of    France 


feriority  of  woman,  were  all  recognized,  and  the  Code  has 
accordingly  been  condemned  in  later  days  by  socialist  and 
feminist  advocates.  But  it^embodied  the  best  of  what  the 
Revolution  had  brought,  along  with  the  excellence  of  the 
Roman  Law;  and  therefore  it  endured  in  France,  and  was 
soon  adopted  in  most  of  those  parts  of  Europe  where  the 
Roman  Law  previously  had  prevailed. 

Finally,  the  system  of  education  which  had  been  planned 
under  the  Convention  was  carried  into  effect.  Avowedly, 
elementary  schools  were  to  be  established  in  every  part  of 
the  country,  though  Bonaparte  seems  to  have  cared  little 
about  educating  the  great  body  of  the  people.  Higher  up 
were  grammar  schools,  high  schools  or  lycees,  technical  and 
other  schools,  and  finally  at  the  top  was  the  University  of 
France.  This  system  was  entirely  under  the  control  of  the 
government,  for  Bonaparte  wished  that  the  schools  should 
teach  only  what  the  government  desired.  In  this  he  was 
largely  successful,  so  far  as  his  system  of  education  was 
established;  but  actually  he  could  not  bring  about  much 
of  what  he  planned  because  it  was  difficult  to  get  the 
teachers.  Accordingly,  instruction  of  most  of  the  children 
continued  for  a  long  time  to  be  given  in  private  schools 
controlled  by  the  Church. 

He  was  zealous  in  developing  the  resources  of  France 
and  constructing  great  public  works.  Harbors  were  im- 
proved, naval  bases  fortified  and  enlarged,  highways 
constructed  and  great  military  roads  prepared,  canals 
bettered  and  extended,  and  marshes  drained.  The  great 
palaces  built  in  the  Old  Regime  were  beautified  and 
restored,  and  in  Paris  splendid  avenues  and  fine  buildings 
were  constructed.  Hitherto  Venice  and  Rome  had  been 
the  pleasure-capitals  of  Europe,  but  now  they  began  to 
be  displaced  by  Paris,  which  gradually  attained  a  suprem- 
acy never  afterward  lost. 

This  constructive  and  peaceful  work  was  Bonaparte's 
greatest  achievement,  but  while  he  lived,  certainly  outside 


NAPOLEON  77 

of  France,  it  was  almost  lost  to  sight  amid  the  continued 
and  terrible  wars  which  marked  his  era.     In  1802  France  / 
was  the  mightiest  power  in  the  world.     All  of  her  enemies 
had  been  defeated  or  forced  to  make  peace,  and  she  had 
got  territory  which  she  had  been  striving  to  obtain  for 
hundreds  of  years.     It  wouldjbe  now  the  work  of  a  great 
statesman  to  keep  peace,  above  all  things,  and  try  to  re- 
tain what  had  been  so  fortunately  won.     That  was  what^ 
Frederick  of  Prussia  had  achieved  in  the  later  portion  of 
his  reign,  and  it  was  afterward  the  achievement  of  Bis- 
marck.    In  this  task  Bonaparte  failed.     In  1803  France  V Bonaparte's 
and  England  were  at  war  again.     During  the  next  twelve  ,  t*sk 
years  with  scarcely  any  intermission,  French  armies  swept  V  I'Cu^  *  " 
over  Europe,  the  European  Powers  rose  against  France  in   | ,  SaJIav^ 
one  coalition  after  another,  some  miUions  of  men  were    <J'%ji,^j^^ 
killed  or  disabled,  and  in  the  end  France,  overwhelmed,  lost   *^  (j^ 
not  only  what  Bonaparte  had  gained  for  the  moment  but 
also  the  magnificent  conquests  of  the  Revolution.     After- 
v/ard  it  appeared  to  men  that  his  greatest  error  was  failure 
to  give  France  time  to  consolidate  what  she  had  gained. 
It  would  seem,  however,  that  his  failure,  while  partly  due 
to  faults  of  his  character,  was  also  owing  to  causes  which     Y 
he  could  not  control.  |  ' 

He  was,  indeed,  filled  with  ambition  and  a  feeling  of  His  position 
superiority  to  others.  He  believed  that  from  himself 
greater  and  better  things  were  to  come.  Also  heioved  war 
and  the  greatness  that  conquerors  have.  Moreover,  his 
power  in  France  rested  on  no  herjeditary  or  legitimate  right, 
then  all-important,  but  solely  on  his  own  great  achieve- 
ments. He  had  come  to  power  when  France  was  in  con- 
fusion and  the  coimtry  beset  by  its  foes.  Li__1802  the 
people  voted  to  make  him  First  Consul. fojc-44fe.  Two 
years  later,  after  another  plSbiscite  in  his  favor,  in  Notre 
Dame,  in  the  presence  of  the  Pope,  he  crowned  himself 
Emperor  of  the  French.  But  as  peace  and  prosperity  Em^p^eror* 
returned,  opponents  would  almost  certainFy^question  his     i804 


78 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Hostility 
not  to  be 
avoided 


Europe  hos- 
tile to  the 
Revolution 


Necessity  of 
great  mod- 
eration 


right,  unless  the  attention  of  the  people  were  fastened  upon 
other  things.  So,  he  found  it  almost  necessary  to  embark 
in  foreign  wars  and  win  great  victories  in  order  to  maintain 
his  position  in  Paris. 

But  there  was  also  another  side.  At  the  end  of  his  life, 
in  exile,  he  declared  he  had  wished  for  peace  but  that  his 
enemies  would  not  let  him  have  it.  In  that  there  may  be 
much  truth.  It  must  be  remembered  that  what  had  re- 
cently happened  in  France  had  overturned  the  old  balance 
of  power  and  given  an  inconceivably  rude  blow  to  the 
old  order  of  things  in  all  places  near  by.  Usually  most 
men  and  women  are  cpnservative,  holding  to  the  things 
to  which  they  have  long  been  accustomed,  and  not  willing 
to  make  more  than  slight  reform  and  gradual  changes. 
In  France  there  had  just  been  immense  changes,  which 
came  as  a  shock  to  all  the  conservative  people  in  Europe; 
and  while  in  the  beginning  liberal  people  everywhere  sym- 
pathized with  the  reforms  which  Frenchmen  were  making, 
everywhere  established  interests  and  upper  classes,  vested 
right  and  conservative  instinct,  were  against  them.  Then 
when  presently  the  excesses  of  the  Terror  were  spoken  of 
with  loathing  in  every  European  country,  great  numbers  of 
people  went  gradually  over  to  those  who  were  already  op- 
posed to  what  was  happening  in  France.  And  finally, 
when  French  influence  and  power  became  greater  than 
ever  they  had  been  before,  it  was  not  only  the  wealthy, 
the  upper,  and  the  governing  classes,  seeing  Europe  threat- 
ened by  ideas  subversive  of  all  that  they  cherished,  who 
were  hostile  to  the  French  Republic,  but  a  great  many 
others  who  beheld  Europe  endangered  now  by  a  new  French 
empire  which  bade  fair  to  become  so  powerful  that  it 
could  overthrow  all  other  states. 

In  this  posture  of  affairs  it  would  have  been  the  first 
task  of  a  statesman  to  act  with  such  moderation  and  care 
that  the  greatest  of  his  opponents,  like  Austria  and  Eng- 
land, would  have  waited  at  least.    Perhaps  the    other 


NAPOLEON 


79 


powers  might  have  been  brought  in  time  to  accept  the  fact 
of  a  France  more  powerful  than  ever  before.  Perhaps 
Napoleon  would  have  failed  despite  his  best  efforts,  but 
it  was  the  first  premise  of  wise  policy  to  do  everything  to 
keep  the  peace  at  least  until  he  had  built  up  a  navy  with 
which  he  might  have  some  chance  to  contest  on  the  seas 
with  Great  Britain.  He  did  indeed  begin  to  do  this  but 
when  Englishmen  saw  the  greatest  power  that  had  existed 
on  the  Continent  for  a  hundred  years  in  possession  of 
Belgium,  which  for  ages  they  had  dreaded  to  see  in  the 
hands  of  any  strong  state,  and  beheld  Napoleon  busily 
scheming  to  obtain  a  colonial  empire  in  the  West  Indies,  in 
Louisiana,  and  in  the  East,  and  apparently  intriguing  to 
get  still  more  power  in  Europe,  they  became  suspicious  and 
hostile,  and  refused  to  carry  out  the  stipulations  of  the 
Treaty  of  Amiens  about  the  island  of  Malta.  Then  Na- 
poleon openly  prepared  for  the  contest,  and  in  May j  1803, 
Great  Britain  declared  war  upon  him. 

He  proposed  to  destroy  England  by  cutting  off  her  com- 
merce with  the  Continent,  upon  which  he  believed  her 
strength  to  be  foimded,  and  taking  a  great  army  into  Eng- 
land itself.  In  north  France  an  army  was  prepared  for  the 
stroke.  Afterward  men  believed  that  this  was  merely  a 
feint  to  deceive  other  foes,  but  there  is  little  doubt  that 
the  invasion  was  really  intended.  "All  the  ills  and  curses 
which  can  afflict  mankind  come  from  London,"  said 
Napoleon;  and  he  rightly  understood  that  conquest  of 
England  must  precede  the  lasting  peace  which  he  wanted 
to  make.  His  plan,  indeed,  was  much  like  that  of  the 
Germans,  more  than  a  hundred  years  later;  to  overthrow 
the  British  government,  and  establish  an  independent  re- 
public in  Ireland,  and  he  said  that  he  would  set  free  the 
mass  of  the  people  in  England.  But  his  design  came  to 
nothing,  for  he  never  got  control  of  the  narrow  stretch  of 
waters  from  Boulogne  to  Dover;  and  because  of  the  British 
ships,  England,  though  in  sight,  remained  out  of  reach. 


France 
and  Great 
Britain 


Attempted 
invasion  of 
England 


80 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  Third 
Coalition 


His    crown- 
ing  triumph 


England 
keeps   con- 
trol   of    the 


Trafalgar 
the  turmng 
point 


Thus  in  1804  and  1805,  as  in  the  years  from  1914  to  1918, 
Britain  was  saved  by  her  mastery  of  the  sea. 

But  other  enemies  were  reached  and  struck  down. 
Austria  was  goaded  on  to  war.  All  the  while  Pitt,  the 
British  prime  minister,  was  trying  to  bring  about  another 
alliance  against  France.  In  1805  the  Third  Coalition  was 
formed  of  Great  Britain,  Russia,  Austria,  and  Sweden. 
Then  Napoleon  turned  with  lightning  stroke.  Suddenly 
he  moved  his  army  from  the  Channel,  the  most  powerful 
army  assembled  for  ages,  moved  along  the  new  military 
roads  he  had  made,  rushed  across  western  Germany,  cap- 
tured a  great  Austrian  army  at  Ulm,.  occupied  Vienna,  and' 
then  when  the  Russians,  too  late,  came  up  to  assist  their 
ally,  totally  defeated  combined  Austrians  and  Russians  at 
Austerlitz,  a  village  in  Moravia,  (December  1805).  Aus- 
tria was  bowed  to  the  dust.  By  the  Treaty  of  Presburg 
she  ceded  territory  containing  3,000,000  of  her  subjectsV 
and  was  left  cut  off  and  excluded  from  Italy  and  the  Rhine. 
If  she  were  kept  thus,  then  one  of  the  greatest  of  Napo- 
leon's enemies  was  finally  removed. 

But  on  October  21st,  the  day  after  the  Austrians  sur- 
rendered at  Ulm,  the  French  and  the  Spanish  warships  en- 
countered the  British  fleet,  under  Lord  Nelson,  greatest  of 
English  admirals,  off  Cape  Trafalgar,  not  far  from  Cadiz. 
On  that  day  Nelson,  who  lost  his  life,  was  able  to  fulfil 
his  maxim  that  the  enemy  must  be  annihilated,  not  merely 
defeated.  He  destroyed  French  sea-power,  and  removed 
from  Britain  all  further  danger  of  invasion.  In  the  years 
of  the  long  struggle  which  followed,  French  privateers 
preyed  terribly  on  British  commerce,  and  French  warships 
were  got  together  again ;  but  never  afterward  during  that 
time  was  British  supremacy  really  challenged.  This  was, 
indeed,  the  most  decisive  victory  of  the  war.  After  Tra- 
falgar Napoleon  could  never  hope  to  reach  England,  and 
by  no  other  device  was  he  ever  able  to  defeat  her.  Great 
Britain  by  herself  was  not  able  to  overthrow  Napoleon, 


A 


NAPOLEON 


81 


but  she  was  the  indispensable  part  of  the  opposition  to 
him.  Not  long  after  1805  Napoleon  had  defeated  every 
Continental  power  tliat  had  dared  to  oppose  him,  and 
brought  into  alliance  with  him  all  the  others.  It  often 
seemed  then  that  he  never  could  be  overthrown.  But 
through  all  these  days  England  remained  unconquered  and 
out  of  his  reach,  and,  having  encouraged  his  enemies  and 
given  them  assistance  whenever  they  dared  to  oppose  him, 
in  the  end  she  took  a  memorable  part  in  humbling  his 
power.  That  she  was  able  to  do  this  was  owing  to  Nelson's 
victory  at  Trafalgar.  — ' 

Meanwhile  Napoleon  went  on  to  new  triumphs.  Prussia  Prussia 
was  reckoned  a  strong  military  state,  though  actually  her  conquered 
war  power  was  now  in  decay.  Before  Austerlitz  she  had 
threatened  to  join  the  Coalition,  and  at  that  time,  with 
Napoleon  irrVienfia,  far  from  his  base,  her  accession  might 
have  been  fatal  to  him.  Now  in  1806,  when  it  was  really 
too  late,  she  declared  war  upon  France.  At  once  Napoleon 
sprang  upon  his  prey.  In  October  Prussian  military  power 
was  laid  in  the^ust  at  Jena  and  Auerstadt,  all  the  Prussian  Jena 
fortresses  were  captured,  and  Berlin  was  taken.  He  then  "" — 
went  forward  against  the  Russians  advancing,  and  occupied 
Warsaw.  Early  in  1807,  in  East  Prussia,  a  terrible  battle 
was  fought  in  the  midst  of  blinding  snow-storms  at 
Preussisch-Eylau,  where  the  French  suffered  heavy  loss  and 
gained  nothing.  But  in  June  the  Russians  were  caught 
at  a  disadvantage  at  Friedland  in  East  Prussia,  and  there 
they  were  utterly  shattered.  Russia  had  scarcely  been 
touched  yet,  and  after  events  were  to  show  that  her  vast 
extent  made  her  unconquerable  until  modern  means  of 
transportation  had  altered  all  warfare,  yet  the  disaster  of 
Friedland  profoundly  discouraged  the  Tsar,  Alexander  I. 
He  sued  for  peace,  and  meeting  Napoleon,  concluded  the 
Treaty  of  Tilsit. 

By  this  treaty  the  Third  Coalition  was  broken  to  pieces.     The  Treaty 
Prussia  lost  half  her  territory.     Her  part  of  Poland  was     ofTiTsit.iso? 


82 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  Napole- 
onic Empire: 
refonns 


Oppression 


erected  into  the  Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw,  thus  making 
in  east  central  Europe  a  new  state  dependent  on  France. 
A  crushing  indemnity  was  levied  on  Prussia,  and  she  was 
forbidden  to  have  an  army  of  more  than  42,000  men. 
Thus  she  was  put  from  the  rank  of  great  powers.  Russia 
lost  almost  nothing.  She  entered  into  an  understanding 
with  France  by  which  British  goods  were  to  be  excluded 
from  ports  under  her  control,  but  she  had  permission  to  do 
as  she  would  with  Turkey,  from  whom  she  desired  terri- 
tory, and  with  Sweden,  from  whom  she  wished  to  get 
Finland.  Only  Britain  and  Sweden  now  remained  at  war 
with  France.  In  1808-9  the  Russians  took  Finland;  and 
presently  Sweden  made  peace  with  France,  accepting  one 
of  Napoleon's  generals  as  her  king. 

Napoleon  was  now  the  most  powerful  ruler  in  Europe 
since  Charlemagne,  and  the  French  Empirewas  greater  by 
far  than  the  dominions  once  ruled  by  Charles  V  or  Louis 
XrV.  Throughout  the  Empire  and  in  most  of  the  depen- 
dent states  excellent  reforms  were  made.  The  French 
Revolution  now  really  came  into  the  lands  surrounding 
France.  Serfdom  and  feudal  rights  were  abolished,  the 
Code  NapolSon  was  introduced,  with  civil  equality  and 
freedom  from  the  old  burdens,  and,  as  had  been  the  case 
in  France,  old  cumbersome  restrictions  were  sw^ept  away, 
justice  made  simpler  and  easier  to  obtain,  and  government 
much  more  efl&cient.  Especially  were  the  results  notable 
in  northern  Italy  and  the  German  lands.  But  a  heavy 
price  was  paid  for  it  all.  Even  in  France,  where  there  was 
now  much  prosperity  and  material  progress,  great  glory 
and  large  renown.  Napoleon's  rule  was  a  despotism  partly 
supported  by  his  army  and  partly  by  innumerable  police- 
men and  spies.  From  the  neighboring  and  subject  lands 
his  family  and  his  generals  amassed  great  fortunes; 
vast  sums  of  money  were  taken  in  contributions  and 
taxes,  and  the  best  of  the  young  men  claimed  as  con- 
scripts for  his  army.     Finally  the  continued  wars  and 


NAPOLEON 


83 


the  blockade  by  England  brought  increasing  confusion  and 
hardship.^ 

This  power,  which  had  been  constructed  with  the  utmost 
ability,  had  none  the  less  been  erected  by  force,  and  only 
by  strength  and  force  could  it  be  maintained.  It  had  been 
possible  because  of  the  fervor  of  the  French  Revolution  in 
the  first  place,  and  because  of  the  division  and  mistakes 
of  the  adversaries  of  France.  Slowly  they  had  learned  in 
the  school  of  adversity,  and  even  now  in  the  days  of  their 
utmost  degradation  causes  were  at  work  which  were  des- 
tined in  TK>  sh^ttime  to  lay  In  the  dust  all  the  structure 
which  Napoleon  had  reared. 

But  in  1809  contemporaries,  perhaps,  could  discern 
nothing  of  all  this,  and  the  outlook  seems  to  have  appeared 
hopeless.  Only  Great  Britain,  behind  her  barrier  of  war- 
ships, remained  unconquered  and  not  despairing,  though 
often,  as  her  people  sustained  the  unending  struggle,  they 
must  have  reflected  that  across  the  Channel  was  the  mili- 
tary despotism  which  had  defeated  all  the  enemies 
it  had  reached,  and  that  some  day,  perhaps,  with  the  re- 
sources of  the  Continent,  Napoleon  might  assemble  over- 
whelming sea-power,  after  which  nothing  could  save  them. 
But  always  they  fought  on  unyielding,'and  in  the  end  it  was 
found  that  their  resources,  based  on  commercial  supremacy 
and  their  new  industrial  development,  were  equal  to  the 
task  set  before  them. 

The  da^nfall  of  Napoleon  was  due  very  largely  to 
the  efforts  he  made  to  conquer  England.  Her  navy 
protected  her  from  military  subjugation,  but  he  believed 
that  destruction  of  her  commerce  would  entail  her  defeat, 
and  he  endeavored  to  shut  her  off  from  trading  with 
Europe.  He  had  tried  to  do  this  in  1801,  but  it  was  defin- 
itely carried  out  in  the  Berlin  Decree  (1806)  and  the  Milan 
Decree  (1807)  and  the  Decree  of  Fontainebleau  (1810), 
by  which  successively  he  ordered  that  British  ships  should 
not  be  permitted  to  trade  with  the  Continent,  that  neutral 


Maintained 
bjT  force 


Apparently 
not  to  be 
overthrown 


Attempted^ 
blockade  _  of 
Great 
Britain 


84 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Disastrous 
results 


Conquest  of 
Spain 


The 

Peninsular 
War 


ships  bringing  British  goods  should  be  seized,  and  that 
imported  British  goods  should  be  publicly  burned.  To 
this  policy  Britain  replied  with  the  Orders  in  Council  of 
1807,  declaring  liable  to  capture  all  ships  trading  with 
France  and  her  allies.  Thus  the  two  tried  to  blockade 
each  other. 

British  sea-power  ruined  the  commerce  of  France  and 
those  countries  that  followed  French  dictates.  Napo- 
leon's decrees  wrought  enormous  loss  to  British  trade,  but 
they  never  caused  her  to  break  down,  and  indeed  they 
could  only  be  partly  enforced.  Numerous  exceptions 
were  authorized  by  Napoleon  himself,  so  great  was  the 
need  of  things  which  could  only  be  bought  from  Britain. 
In  the  end  the  principal  result  of  Napoleon's  attempts  was 
to  alienate  profoundly  some  of  the  European  people  whose 
commerce  he  ruined,  and  then  involve  him  in  ruinous  en- 
terprises— as  with  Spain  and  with  Russia — to  enforce  his 
blockade. 

In  1807  Napolepn.  proposed  to  debar  England  from 
Portugal  and  the  harbors  of  Spain.  For  some  years  Spain 
had  acted  as  a  vassal  of  France,  but  Portugal  had  long 
been  bound  closely  to  England  by  the  Methuen  trade 
agreement.  He  now  demanded  that  Portugal  adhere  to 
his  Continental  System,  and,  when  she  refused,  got  per- 
mission from  Spain  to  send  an  army  through  that  country 
to  Lisbon.  Portugal  was  easily  overrun,  but  it  then  be- 
came apparent  that  he  was  determined  to  acquire  Spain 
also.  French  troops  filled  the  country,  the  king  and  his 
son  were  made  to  abandon  their  rights  to  the  Emperor, 
and  Napoleon  thereupon  put  his  brother  Joseph  on  the 
throne.  But  now  there  began  a  rising  of  the  proud  Span- 
ish people^  in  whom  the  insolent  taking  of  their  country 
awakened  the  fiercest  spirit  of  national  resistance.  Eng- 
land came  to  their  aid,  and  under  a  great  commander. 
Sir  Arthur  Wellesley,  the  small  British  army  found  in  the 
restricted  field  of  Portugal  and  Spain  a  chance  for  success- 


NAPOLEON 


85 


ful  operations.  The  French  were  unable  to  destroy  the 
British  in  Portugal,  who  stood  behind  strong  fortifications 
and  were  based  upon  the  British  fleet.  In  Spain  the 
mountains  and  the  rivers,  as  well  as  scantiness  of  resources 
for  the  invader  to  live  on,  made  it  exceedingly  difficult  for 
the  French  to  carry  on  such  campaigns  as  they  were  accus- 
tomed to  wage.  Some  300,000  of  Napoleon's  best  troops 
were  locked  up  in  the  peninsula  and  largely  destroyed  in 
the  heart-breaking  struggle  which  followed. 

Elsewhere  for  a  while  Napoleon's  power  seemed  to  in- 
crease. In  1809  Austria  again  declared  war.  Napoleon 
hurried  from  Spain,  through  which  he  had  just  swept  in 
triumph,  and,  striking  with  terrible  swiftness,  drove  back 
the  Austrians  from  Bavaria  and  again  took  their  capital, 
Vienna.  But  he  had  not  destroyed  the  Austrian  army,  and 
attempting  to  cross  the  Danube  at  Aspern  he  came  near 
to  suffering  a  total  defeat.  In  July,  however,  he  won  the 
battle  of  Wagram,  and  again  Austria  made  peace.  By  the 
Treaty  of  Vienna  she  lost  more  of  her  territory  and  popula- 
tion, and  promised  not  to  maintain  an  army  of  more  than 
150,000  men.  Shortly  after.  Napoleon  annulled  his  mar- 
riage with  his  wife  Josephine,  who  had  borne  him  no  heir, 
and  in  1810  married  a  daughter  of  the  Emperor  of  Austria. 

In  1810  Napoleon's  Empire-was  at  its  zenith.  Spain  did 
not  yet  seem  dangerous,  and  Russia  was  friendly.  On  the 
Continent  all  his  enemies  had  been  defeated.  TojVance 
had  been  annexed  the  Netherlands,  German  territory  to 
the  Rhine,  northwestern  Italy,  and  Austria's  Adriatic 
coast.  The  remainder  of  Italy,  Spain,  all  western  and 
central  Germany  in  the  Confederation  of  the  Rhine,  and 
the  Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw  were  under  Napoleon's  pro- 
tection. Austria  and  Prussia  remained  humbled  and 
diminished. 

But  in  this  vast  empire,  which  controlled  all  western  and 
central  Europe,  the  forces  of  decay  were  at  work.  The 
national  revival  which  was  making  Spaniards  give  up  all 


Austria  de- 
feated again 


The  Empire 
at  its 
zenith 


Foi:ces  of 
decay  and 
destruction 


86 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Decline  of 
Revolution- 
ary ardor 


Discord  be- 
tween 
Russia  and 
France 


rather  than  surrender,  was  stirring  also  in  the  German 
countries.  In  Prussia  they  were  making  reforms  and 
schooling  themselves  for  the  day  of  deliverance  hoped  for. 
Indeed  circumstances  now  were  doing  for  the  German 
people  the  wondrous  work  which  some  years  before  had 
been  accomplished  in  France,  and  this  was  taking  place  at 
a  time  when  among  the  French  in  the  midst  of  prosperity 
and  greatness  the  Revolutionary  feelings  were  losing  their 
force.  Once  France  had  defended  herself  from  Europe  by 
a  national  rising  of  her  people,  but  now  with  her  yoke 
heavy  on  others  the  armies  of  Napoleon  were  composed 
largely  of  conscript  soldiers,  whom  other  peoples  were  com- 
pelled to  provide.  These  levies  were  wonderfully  disci- 
plined and  drilled,  and  they  won  great  victories  for  him, 
but  no  longer  was  it  possible  for  his  armies  to  be  animated 
by  the  feelings  that  once  filled  the  people  of  France. 
Moreover,  Napoleon  was  not  as  before.  He  had  raised  up 
many  a  man  of  ability  to  be  a  marshal  or  great  assistant, 
and  thus  surrounded  himself  with  very  capable  assistants; 
but  in  these  later  years  he  was  much  less  inclined  to  take 
their  advice,  and  came  at  last  to  rely  almost  altogether  on 
himself. 

The  accord  with  Russia  was  slowly  breaking  to  pieces. 
Russia  was  almost  entirely  an  agricultural  state,  dependent 
for  industrial  products  and  foreign  wares  upon-commerce 
with  others,  especially  England.  The  Continental  Sys- 
tem, which  Napoleon  had  persuaded  the  Tsar  to  uphoU, 
worked  increasing  hardship  on  the  Russian  pepple,^^d  as 
the  years  passed  ifc^'M  partly  abandoned.  TctNapoleon 
enforcement  of  the  blockade  against  Britain^  was_still  all- 
important,  and  at  the  beginning  of  1812  he  prepared  to 
conquer  Russia  and  thus  definitely  complete  hislystem  in 
Europe.  For  this  mighty  task  he  collected  the  greatest 
army  brought  together  in  Europe  for  ages,  and  the  most 
powerful  force,  perhaps,  which  up  to  that  time  had  ever 
been  assembled.     To  his  French  veterans  were  added 


NAPOLEON 


87 


contingents  from  the  subject  and  vassal  states,  until  he 
had  ready  for  the  adventure  600,000  men  and  more  than 
1,000  cannon. 

In  June  a  great  part  of  Napoleon's  forces,  the  Grande 
ArmSey  crossed  the  Niemen  River  into  Russia.  He  hoped 
to  meet  the  Muscovite  hosts  and  destroy  them  on  some 
memorable  field.  But  Kutusov,  the  cautious  Russian 
commander,  steadily  retreated,  avoiding^battle,  ever  luring 
his  enemy  forward^  liTSeptember  Napoleon  gained  the 
terrible,  empty  victory  of  Borodino.  Both  sides  suffered 
fearful  Tosses,  but  the  Russian  army  retreated  undestroyed. 
A  month  later  he  entered  Moscow,  the  old  capital  of 
Russia,  in  triumph;  but  the  enemy  did  not  sue  for  peace 
as  he  hoped,  and  Napoleon  now  found  himself  far  in  the 
depths  of  a  hostile  country,  separated  from  his  base  of 
operations  by  a  thousand  miles,  half  of  it  the  dreary  plain 
of  Lithuania  and  Great  Russia.  Furthermore,  on  the  night 
of  the  entry,  Moscow  was  burned  and  partly  destroyed. 
Then  while  the  Russian  army  watched  from  near  by  the 
peasants  rose  up  in  wrath  to  harass  what  remained  of 
Napoleon's  forces,  and  soon  he  had  to  withdraw.  The 
retreat  which  followed  was  one  of  the  most  awful  episodes 
in  military  history.  The  greater  part  of  the  Grand  Arniy 
had  been  dissipated  before  Moscow  was  reached,  but  most 
of  what  was  left  perished  horribly  in  the  fearful  march 
through  the  snows  and  the  storms  of  the  Russian  winter 
which  soon  came  on.  Not  more  than  50,000  of  all  the  host 
which  had  set  forth  came  back  to  the  German  frontier,  and 
they  came  as  miserable,  stricken  men.  It  was  evident  that 
the  best  and  greatest  part  of  Napoleon's  strength  had  been 
lost  in  the  vastness  of  Russia^. 

In  December  Russia,  Great  Britain,  Sweden,  and  Prussia 
began  the  Sixth  Coalition  against  France.  In  January, 
1813  the  Emperor  of  Russia  crossed  his  frontier  and  prom- 
ised liberation  to  the  European  peoples.  At  once  the 
Prussians  rose  in  a  great  national  movement,  and  the 


Invasion  of 
Russia,  1812 


The  retreat 


The  Sixth 
CoaTifioa 


88 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Napoleon 
defeated 


Refuses  any 
compromise 


Napoleon 
at  bay 


other  German  states  began  to  waver.  Napoleon  assem- 
bled another  army,  but  the  forces  being  gathered  against 
his  own  dwindling  strength  were  too  great  to  be  over- 
thrown, and  the  victories  which  he  gained  at  LUtzen  and 
Bautzen  were  not  decisive.  Austria  now  tried  to  inter- 
vene, suggesting  that  Napoleon  abandon  his  arrangements 
in  central  Europe,  but  he  would  hear  of  no  compromise, 
and  when  the  armistice  came  to  an  end  Austria  joined  the 
coalition  against  him.  In  August__the_j5-Lis^^iajis  were 
badly  defeated^afDresdelirHit  again  Napoleon  failed  to 
destroy  his  foe.  Then  in  October  the  issue  was  decided 
at  the  great  "Battle  of  the  Na^onsILatj^eipzig,  where  at 
last  he  was  completely  defeated.  He  struggled  across^EFe 
Rhine  with' a  remnant  of  his^army,  and  Germany  was  free. 

He  might  still  have  got  terms  that  now  seem  very  good. 
He  might  have  kept  the  "natural  boundaries"  of  France, 
the  Rhine,  the  Alps,  the  Pyrenees,  if.  elsewhere  lie  had 
abandoned  his  system.  This  would  have  left  France  with 
more  than  Louis  XIV  had  ever  been  able  to  keep,  but  Na- 
poleon refused.  Afterward  historians  condemned  him 
as  a  desperate  gambler  in  scorning  such  terms  and  staking 
all  on  trial  by  combat.  But  in  truth,  since  his  power  had 
been  reared  on  military  triumph,  the  acceptance  of  such 
terms,  whatever  benefit  France  might  have  got,  would 
certainly  have  involved  his  own  ruin.  So  he  refused,  and 
made  ready  to  defend  France  with  such  scanty  forces  as 
he  still  could  assemble,  for  not  only  was  France  weakened, 
but  there  >yas  now  no  great  rising  of  the  French  people 
as  there  had  been  in  Revolutionary  days. 

The  campaigns  of  1814  showed  Napoleon  still  at  the 
height  of  his  military  skill,  but  against  the  overwhelming 
forces  brought  upon  France  nothing  could  avail.  When 
he  rejected  harder  terms  than  had  been  offered  previously. 
Great  Britain,  Russia,  Prussia,  and  Austria  made  the 
Treaty  of  Chaumont  (March  1814),  by  which  they  con- 
cluded an  alliance  and  promised  not  to  halt  until  Napoleon 


NAPOLEON  89 

was  completely  overthrown.  In  the  end  they  overwhelmed 
his  forces  and  got  to  Pans.  At  last  he  abdicated,  and 
was  given  the  little  island  of  Elba,  near  Italy,  in  the 
Mediterranean.  — 

The  Allies  restored  the  BourbqnsjtoJFrance,  and  soon  The  "Hun- 
there  was  some  discontent.  Then  Napoleon,  restless  in  dred  Dijrs" 
his  insignificant  state,  and  believing  that  his  enemies  were 
now  too  divided  to  act  in  unison  against  him,  suddenly,  in 
March  1815,  returned  to  France,  and  with  his  matchless 
magnetism,  and  through  the  old  renown  which  still  re- 
mained to  him,  won  all  who  were  sent  to  oppose  him.  He 
would  for  the  moment  have  chosen  peace,  but  the  Great 
Powers,  whose  representatives  were  wrangling  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Vienna  recently  assembled,  at  once  forgot  all  their 
differences,  and  assembled  their  forces  to  destroy  him. 
Napoleon  got  together  a  superb  army  of  200,000  men — 
largely  his  old  veterans,  who,  until  the  peace,  had  been  cap- 
tive in  other  lands — and  at  once  took  the  field.  In  June, 
after  some  brilliant  but  indecisive  strokes,  the  matter  came_ 
to  final  decision  at  Waterloo,  not  far  from  Brussels  in  Bel-  Waterloo 
gium.  There  throughout  a  long  day  the  French  artillery 
wrought  havoc  in  the  ranks  of  an  army  of  Englishmen, 
Dutchmen,  and  others  under  Wellington,  and  the  French 
horsemen  dashed  themselves  again  and  again  at  the 
enemy's  lines.  About  evening  the  Prussians  came  up  to 
assist,  and  then  the  French  army,  which  had  been  terribly 
shattered  in  the  struggle,  fled  from  the  field  in  total  rout, 
and  Napoleon's  power  was  definitely  ended. 

He  surrendered  to  the  British,  and  was  presently  sent  to  st.  Helena 
the  remote,  lonely  island  of  St.  Helena,  off  the  soutHwest 
African  coast,  a  thousand  miles  out  in  the  ocean.  There 
for  six  years  he  lived  on,  eating  his  heart  out  in^exile,  and 
appearing,  when  men  could  forget  the  misery  he  had 
caused,  one  of  the  most  pathetic  figures  in  history.  He 
had  put  himself  above  mankind,  and  they  put  him  forth 
from  among  them. 


90 


EUROPE,    1879-1920 


Estimate  of 
his  career 


The  evil 


Napoleon 
and  the 
French 
Revolution 


It  is  still  diflScult  to  pass  judgment.  •  During  his  life- 
time, he  appeared  as  a  mighty  hero  in  France  and  to  many 
people  elsewhere,  while  in  Prussia  and  in  England  men  felt 
that  he  was  a  monstrous  and  terrible  being.  Not  less  than 
fourjaullion  men  in  Europe  were  lost  in  the  wars  caused  by 
his  needs  or  ambitions.  In  his  own  day  he  was  Tike  the 
reincafiiation  o!  some  war-god  of  old.  Afterward  Taine 
saw  in  him  the  last  and  greatest  of  the  condottieri,  those 
captains  in  Italy  who  made  war  their  ambition  and  trade. 
For  a  while  he  was  hated  by  those  who  had  overthrown 
him;  but  presently  with  the  lapse  of  time  there  was  a  gla- 
mour of  romance  about  his  name,  and  often  his  statecraft 
and  milita'fy  methods  were  studied  and  admired.  No- 
where was  this  done  more  than  in  Germany,  where  a  school 
of  Prussian  generals  and  writers  openly  proclaimed  his 
greatness  and  their  purpose  of  following  his  steps.  When 
after  1914  they  did  this  the  world  was  horrified,  and  once 
more  understood  the  real  meaning  of  some  of  his  deeds. 

There  is  another  side  to  his  achievements,  which  may 
be  more,  may  be  less  than  the  evil,  but  is  none  the  less  of 
supreme  importance.  Whether  without  him  the  French 
Revolution  could  have  maintained  itself  against  hostile 
and  conservative  Europe  suflSciently  to  fulfil  its  great 
mission  we  cannot  now  know.  But  certain  it  is  that 
Napoleon  helped  to  preserve  Jt  and  spreadjtswork  over 
the  central  and  southern  lands.  When  he  was  gone,  his 
conquerors  could  no  longer  undo  the  best  that  the  Revolu- 
tion had  accomplished.  They  did  try  to  reestablish  an 
old  order,  biil  it  was  very  different  from  what  prevailed 
in  the  previous  era.  After  the  reaction,  revolutionary  and 
progressive  spirit  flamed  out  successfully  again,  and  the 
principles  that  men  should  more  and  more^govern  them- 
selves, and  that  there  should  be  an  increasing,  measure  of 
soci^l^  politipal,  and  civil  equality,  were  in  the  next^Eun- 
dred  years^yery  largely  establisKed  over  part  of  Europe. 
These  were  not  things  which  Napoleon  had  begun,  and 


NAPOLEON  91 

he  had  sympathized  Httle  with  some  of  them;  but  after 
all  he  was  a  "child  of  the  Revolution,"  and  he  had  de- 
fended and  saved  it.  "■" ■ ^  "~ 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  life  of  Napoleon  Bonaparte:  H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  Napoleon 
(1912),  the  best  brief  study  in  EngHsh;  R.  M.  Johnston,  Na- 
poleon, a  Short  Biography  (1910).  Of  longer  works:  August 
Fournier,  Napoleon  I:  eine  Biographie,  3  vols.  (3d  ed.  1914), 
trans,  by  A.  E.  Adams  (1912),  is  the  best.  F.  M.  Kircheisen, 
Napoleon  I:  Sein  Lehen  und  Seine  Zeit,  vols.  I-III  (1912-14); 
Arthur  Levy,  Napoleon  Intime  (7th  ed.  1893),  trans.  The  Private 
Life  of  Napoleon,  2  vols.  (1894),  NapoUon  et  la  iPaix  (1902); 
Frederic  Masson,  Napoleon  et  Sa  Famille,  12  vols.  (5th  ed. 
1897-1915),  Napoleon  a  Sainte-HSlene  (1912);  J.  C.  Ropes, 
The  First  Napoleon  (1900);  J.  H.  Rose,  The  Life  of  Napoleon  I 
(ed.  1907),  The  Personality  of  Napoleon  (1912);  W.  M.  Sloane, 
The  Life  of  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  4  vols.  (ed.  1910). 

For  particular  periods  or  subjects:  Edouard  Driault,  La 
Politique  ExtSrieure  du  Premier  Consul,,  1800-1803  (1910), 
La  Politique  Orientale  de  NapoUon  (1904);  L.  de  Lanzac  de 
Laborie,  Paris  sous  Napoleon,  8  vols.  (1905-13);  L.  Sciout,  Le 
Directoire,  2  vols.  (1895-6);  L.  A.  Thiers,  Histoire  du  Consulat 
el  de  V Empire,  20  vols.  (1844-62),  laudatory;  Albert  Vandal, 
NapoUon  et  Alexandre  P\  3vols.  (3d  ed.  1893-6),  VAvenement 
de  Bonaparte,  2  vols.  (ed.  1911). 

There  are  several  collections  of  the  letters  of  Napoleon,  the 
most  important  being:  Correspondance  de  Napoleon  P^  (pub- 
ished  by  order  of  Napoleon  III),  32  vols.  (1858-70);  Correspon- 
dance Inedite  de  NapoUon  P"  (from  the  War  Archives,  ed.  by 

E.  Picard  and  L.  Tuety),  4  vols.  (1912-13). 
Contemporary  accounts:  the  memoirs  of  Bourrienne  (trans.) 

Chaptal,  Gourgaud  (trans.),  Miot  de  Melito  (trans.),  Madame 
de  Remusat  (trans.),  Roederer,  Segur  (trans.),  Talleyrand- 
Perigord  (trans.),  Thibaudeau,  Thiebault  (trans.),  Villemain. 

F.  J.  Maccunn,  The  Contemporary  English  View  of  Napoleon 
(1914)  contains  much  rare  and  curious  contemporary  informa- 
tion. 

Wars :  A.  Chuquet,  La  Guerre  de  Russie  (1912) ;  J.  S.  Corbett, 
The  Campaign  of  Trafalgar  (1913);  T.  A.  Dodge,  Napoleon:  a 
History  of  the  Art  of  War,  4  vols.  (1904-7);  A.  T.  Mahan,  The 


92  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

Life  of  Nelson,  2  vols.  (1897),  best;  Sea  Power  in  Its  Relation  to 
the  War  of  1812,  2  vols.  (1905);  F.  W.  O.  Maycock,  The  Invasion 
of  France,  1814  (1915);  F.  L.  Petre,  Napoleon's  Campaign  in 
Poland,  1806-1807  (1906),  Napoleon* s  Conquest  of  Prussia, 
1806  (1907),  Napoleon  and  the  Archduke  Charles  (1908),  Napo- 
leons Last  Campaign  in  Germany,  1813  (1912),  Napoleon  at  Bay 
(1914);  Charles  Oman,  History  of  the  Peninsular  War,  5  vols. 
(1902-19),  Wellingtons  Army,  1809-18U  (1912);  J.  C.  Ropes, 
The  Campaign  of  Waterloo  (2d  ed.  (1893). 


w 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA  AND 
THE  CONCERT  OF  EUROPE 

Leurs  Majestes  I'Empereur  d'Autrlche,  le  Roi  de  Prusse,  et  TEm- 
pereur  de  Russie  .  .  .  ayant  acquis  la  conviction  intime, 
qu'il  est  necessaire  d'asseoir  la  marche  a  adopter  par  les  Puissances 
dans  leurs  rapports  mutuels  sur  les  verites  sublimes  que  nous  en- 
seigne  I'eternelle  Religion  du  Dieu  Sauveur: 

Declarent  solonnellement,  que  le  present  Acte  n'a  pour  objet  que  de 
manifester,  a  la  face  de  I'llnivers,  leur  determination  inebranlable 
de  ne  prendre  pour  regie  de  leur  conduite  .  .  .  que  les  pre- 
ceptes  de  cette  Religion  Sainte — preceptes  de  justice,  de  charite 
et  de  paix  qui,  loin  d'etre  uniquement  applicables  a  la  vie  privee, 
doivent  au  contraire  influer  directement  sur  les  resolutions  des 
Princes,  et  guider  toutes  leurs  d-marches.     .     .     . 


The  Holy  Alliance,  14-26  September,  1815: 
State  Papers,  iii.  211. 


British  and  Foreign 


The  long  struggle  of  the  Revolution  and  Napoleonic 
Wars  was  followed  by  a  general  settlement,  as  the  Thirty 
Years'  War  had  been,  and  just  as  the  World  War  which 
ended  in  1918  afterward  was  to  be.  Enormous  social  and 
political  changes  had  come  to  a  great  part  of  Europe,  and 
the  map  of  the  Continent  had  been  completely  changed. 
Now  with  the  Revolution  subsided  and  the  French  Empire 
fallen  to  pieces  the  conquerors  of  Napoleon  assembled  to 
restore  and  rearrange  and  decid«eJ  It  was  a  token  of  Aus- 
tria's recovered  power  that  the  meeting  was  held  in  Vienna. 
/  Peace  had  already  been  made,  May  30,  1814,  by  the 
Treaty  of  Paris.  This  treaty  provided  that  within  two 
months  all  the  powers  engaged  on  either  side  of  the  war 

93 


The  settle- 
ment of 
1814-15 


The 

Congress 
of  Vienna 


94 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Procedure 


Position  of 
France 


just  concluded  should  send  plenipotentiaries  to  Vienna 
"to  settle  at  a  general  Congress  the  arrangements  which 
are  to  complete  the  provisions  of  the  present  treaty." 
In  September,  1814,  there  was  the  greatest  and  most 
gorgeous  gathering  held  in  Europe  up  to  that  time.  The 
Tsar  of  Russia,  the  Emperor  of  Austria,  the  King  of  Prus- 
sia, and  the  kings  of  Bavaria,  WUrtemberg,  and  Denmark 
were  present,  along  with  the  princes  and  rulers  of  smaller 
states,  and  the  representatives  of  France  and  of  England. 

(  Most  important  of  all  was  Metternich,  Austria's  minister^ 
There  was  in  1814,  as  in  1918,  much  feeling  that  the  old  era 
had  come  to  an  end,  that  vast  changes  had  been  made  and 
were  still  to  be  made,  that  the  world  was  to  be  better,  that 
a  golden  era  was  near,  and  that  after  the  horrible  wars 
which  had  devastated  Europe,  there  would  now  be  per- 
petual peace. 

Strictly  speaking  no  congress  was  ever  opened,  and  oflS- 
cially  none  existed.  Actually,  in  the  midst  of  long  and 
magnificent  festivities  at  Vienna,  representatives  of  the 
various  powers  waited,  while  four  great  powers  began  to 
arrange  in  private  meetings  what  was  to  be  done,  and  there 
make  the  important  decisions.  Not  only  were  the  dele- 
gates of  the  lesser  states  thus  excluded  from  the  "Con- 
gress," but  of  the  eight  powers  which  had  been  parties  to 
the  Treaty  of  Paris,  because  of  which  the  Congress  assem- 
bled, two  of  them,  Portugal  and  Sweden,  were  in  the  first 
place  not  invited  to  come  to  a  preparatory  meeting  held 
at  Metternich's  house,  while  Spain  was  never  permitted  to 
participate  in  anything  important.  But  France — ^because 
of  the  very  dexterous  diplomacy  of  her  representative, 
Talleyrand,  who  took  advantage  of  disputes  between  the 
four  principal  members — was  soon  admitted,  and  thereafter 

(the  work  at  Vienna  was  done  by  five  powers:  Great  Bri- 
tain, Russia,  Prussia,  Austria,  and  France!  In  1814  and 
1815  at  Vienna,  as  in  1918  and  1919  at  Paris,  those  who 
wished  the  settlement  made  by  all  the  powers  interested 


/ 


THE  CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA        95 

were  obliged  to  see  the  decisions  made  in  small  secret 
meetings  and  determined  only  by  the  most  powerful  states. 
In  both  cases,  perhaps,  the  work  could  have  been  done  in 
no  other  way. 

(  The  most  important  part  of  the  work  had  to  do  with  Territorial 
territorial  arrangements.  The  proper  or  "legitimate"  arrange- 
sovereigns,  who  had  been  dethroned  by  Napoleon^  were 
restored  in  Spain,  in  Holland,  in  southern  Italy  (the  Two 
Sicilies),  and  in  north  Italy  (Sardinia-Piedmont);  while 
the  Pope  and  various  German  princes  got  back  their  lands, 
most  of  what  Napoleon  had  taken  away  from  Austria  was 
restored  to  her,  and  Poland  partitioned  again.  Great 
Britain  kept  various  colonial  possessions  which  she  had 
taken4-Malta,  islands  in  the  West  Indies,  Trinidad,  British 
Honduras — and  three  possessions  which  had  been  taken 
from  the  Dutch:  Ceylon,  South  Africa,  and  Dutch 
Guiana.  In  compensation,  (Holland  had  Belgium  joined 
to  her  to  form  the  United  Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands.^ 
Before  the  Revolution  Belgium  had  belonged  to  Austria^J 
that  power  now  got  in  compensation  Lombardy  and 
Venetia,  while  other  small  states  in  north  Italy  were  left 
indirectly  under  her  control.  From  Sweden  Prussia  got 
eastern  Pomerania,  last  relic  of  Swedish  conquests  in  the 
days  of  Gustavus  Adolphus,  while  already  Russia  had 
taken  the  Duchy  of  Finland.  In  compensation  Sweden 
got  Norway,  up  to  that  time  under  Denmark's  rule.  /The  Holding 
arbiters  of  Vienna  deemed  it  well  that  France  should  have  France  in 
strong  states  adjoining  her  boundaries,  so  that  she  might 
not  easily  break  forth  again  J  It  was  partly  for  this  reason 
that  Holland  had  been  enlarged  by  the  addition  of  Belgium; 
it  was  for  the  same  reason  that  Prussia,  enlarged  by  a 
portion  of  Saxony,  was  given  provinces  west  of  the  Rhine, 
as  was  Bavaria  also.  |ln  these  arrangqj^ats  the  national- 
ism aroused  since  1789  was  not  so  much  as  considered./ 
Generally  speaking,  the  diplomats  at  Vienna,  like  those  at 
Berlin  in  1878,  altogether  disregarded  aspirations  of  the 


check 


( 


9e 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Nationality 
disregarded 


Constructive 
achievement 


Disagree^ 
ment 


peoplg*.!  Norwegians  and  Swedes  spoke  different  languages 
and  had  long  gone  diflFerent  ways.  Belgians  and  Dutch 
had  been  separate  since  the  time  of  the  struggle  against 
Spain.  The  people  of  Italy  were  beginning  to  yearn  for  a 
united  Italian  nation,  and  the  people  of  the  German  states, 
after  their  magnificent  struggle  against  Napoleon,  were 
more  conscious  than  ever  before  of  their  German  national- 
ity and  the  miserable  weakness  of  their  age-long  disunion. 
But  (the  Italians  were  left  separated,  put  under  Bour- 
bons and  Hapsburgs,  and  Metternich  exerted  all  his 
skill  to  keep  the  Germanics  separate  so  that  Austria  might 
still  rule  by  having  them  divided.  J 

Some  excellent  and  lasting  work  was  accomplished. 
The  Swiss  Confederation  was  reestablished  with  a  guaran- 
tee of  permanent  neutrality,  an  agreement  that  thereafter 
European  powers  would  not  attack  Switzerland  or  send 
their  troops  through  her  territory  This  was  the  beginning 
of  a  series  of  neutralizations  of  small  states  which  seemed 
to  promise  well,  and  did  work  well  for  a  long  time,  until  the 
violation  of  Belgian  neutrality  by  the  German  Empire  in 
1914.  f  Furthermore  the  navigation  of  rivers  flowing 
through  or  between  several  European  countries  was 
declared  free  to  all  these  countries.  And  finally  the 
Congress  declared  that  the  slave  trade  should  be  abol- 
ished ^.J 

This  work  was  accomplished  in  the  midst  of  disputes 
almost  certain  to  break  out  during  a  general  conference 
of  nations;  and  it  was  in  the  midst  of  them  that  Napoleon 
returned  from  Elba  and  began  his  career  of  the  "Hundred 
Days."  /The  bitterest  quarrel  concerned  what  Russia 
and  Prussia  should  have  in  Saxony  and  Poland.  ,' Russia 
came  to  an  understanding  with  Prussia  by  which  she  agreed 
to  assist  her  in  tl||||ig  to  obtain  Saxony,  on  condition  that 
Russia  have  that  part  of  Poland  which  Napoleon  had  set 
up  as  the  Duchy  of  Warsaw.  Austria  resisted  the  ar- 
rangement, and  was  supported  by  England.  \  She  was 


THE  CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA 


97 


Russia 


supported  also  by  France,  for  it  was  largely  by  taking 
advantage  of  the  dissensions  growing  out  of  this  dispute 
that  the  skilful  Talleyrand  was  able  to  get  France  admitted 
as  one  of  the  great  powers  in  the  inner  deliberations  at 
Vienna,  i  In  January  1815  Talleyrand  brought  about  a  Talleyrand 
secret  alliance  between  Great  Britain,  Austria,  and  France 
to  resist,  if  necessary,  the  plan  of  Prussia  and  Russia. 
Presently  a  compromise  was  made.  Prussia  got  about 
two  fifths  of  Saxony,  and  gave  up  all  her  Polish  territory 
except  the  province  of  Posen,  Russia  obtained  nearly  all 
that  she  asked  for.  What  Austria  had  received  in  the  old 
partitions  of  Poland,  she  kept;  but  Russia  now  got  most 
of  the  Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw,  to  which  was  added  some 
Polish  territory  already  in  her  possession,  all  of  which 
she  erected  into  a  kingdom  of  Poland  under  the  TsarJ 
She  now  extended  farther  into  central  Europe  than  pre- 
viously, and  during  the  course  of  the  nineteenth  century 
she  was  to  exert  more  influence  upon  her  neighbors  and 
be  a  greater  factor  in  European  affairs  than  ever  before. 
Her  Polish  territory  protruded  henceforth  like  a  great 
salient  or  bastion  in  between  the  lands  of  Austria  and 
Prussia,  her  neighbors  and  rivals.  As  long  as  she  was 
dreaded  for  what  was  believed  to  be  her  mighty  military 
power,  her  neighbors  would  always  have  to  fear  her  Polish 
position;  but  when  at  last  the  matter  was  put  to  the  test 
of  war  it  would  be  seen  that  this  protruding  possession 
made  it  possible  for  them  to  deal  her  a  mortal  thrust. 
Meanwhile  the  Poles,  mostly  under  Russia,  but  partly  in 
Prussia  and  partly  in  Austria,  were  to  yearn  fondly  for  the 
old  days  when  Poland  had  been  independent,  and  look 
forward  wistfully  to  some  future  day  when  independence 
might  be  restored. 

These  arrangements  being  concluded  and  presently 
ratified  in  the  Final  Act  (June  9,  1815),  the  leaders  of  the 
Congress  proceeded  to  more  general  and  more  important 
considerations.     Some  of  them  desired  that  such  measures 


Efforts  for  a 

lasting 

settlement 


\ 


/xhe  Holy 
Alliance, 
1815 


Earlier  ^ 
schemes 
for  perpet- 
ual peace 


C 


98  EUROPE,   1789-19^6 

should  now  be  taken  that  there  might  be  no  more  war; 
some  believed  that,  the  disorder  of  the  Revolution  being 
largely  at  an  end,  the  desirable  conditions  that  had  just 
been  established  ought  to  be  preserved  by  united  action 
of  the  powers.  Out  of  all  this  grew  the  attempts  to  have 
European  affairs  thereafter  controlled  by  a  Concert  of 
Europe. 

The  sincerest  and  most  far-reaching  attempt  to  estab- 
lish justice  and  maintain  peace  in  European  affairs  was 
made  by  Alexander,  Tsar  of  the  Russias.  /^This  was  the 
project,  derided  at  the  time  and  suspected  afterward, 
which  was  known  as  the  Holy  Alliance^^  Circumstances 
had  made  the  Tsar  appear  as  the  savior  of  Europe,  and  he 
wished  now  to  be  the  regenerator  of  the  nations  of  his  time. 
He  loved  to  think  of  himself  as  a  liberal,  though  he  did  not 
make,  and  doubtless  could  not  make,  much  effort  to  apply 
liberalism  in  Russia.  He  dreamed  much  also  of  being 
able  to  abolish  all  war.  In  1814  and  1815  many  people 
hoped  for  this.  It  had  been  so  before,  after  long  and 
exhausting  wars,  and  a  century  later  it  would  be  so  again. 
Philanthropists  like  William  Penn  and  philosophers  like 
Emmanuel  Kant  had  proposed  plans  by  which  war  might 
be  avoided,  and  from  time  to  time  statesmen  and  political 
writers  had  drawn  up  schemes.  Two  centuries  before, 
during  a  lull  in  the  long  wars  of  religion,  Queen  Elizabeth 
of  England  had  pondered  upon  such  things,  and  her  con- 
temporary Henry  IV  had  conceived  of  the  "Grand  De- 
sign," whereby,  a  general  council  of  delegates  from  the 
powers  of  Europe  should  peaceably  settle  disputes.  A 
century  later  in  1713,  after  the  exhausting  struggle  of  the 
War  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  a  Frenchman,  the  Abbe  de 
Saint-Pierre,  suggested  a  league  of  nations  whose  members 
should  settle  their  disputes  by  the  arbitration  of  a  general 
congress.  Now  in  1814  came  the  Tsar  Alexander,  filled 
with  mystical  yearning  to  make  the  world  better  and  es- 
tablish a  lasting  peace. 


THE  CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA 


99 


For  some  years  he  had  been  attempting  to  win  adherence 
to  his  ideas.  Then,  as  afterward,  men  perceived  the 
almost  insuperable  diflSculties,  and  looked  at  the  matter 
from  the  point  of  view  of  the  old  order,  which  the  reform 
was  designed  to  make  better.  Nevertheless,  after  Water- 
loo, when  the  triumphant  Allies  were  in  Paris,  and  when 
they  were  imposing  upon  France  new  and  severer  terms  of 
peace,  Alexander  submitted  to  his  particular  allies,  Aus- 
tria and  Prussia,  a  document  containing  his  ideas,  which 
they  accepted.  So,  in  the  name  of  "the  very  holy  and 
indivisible  Trinity'*  the  rulers  of  these  three  countries  now 
proclaimed  their  fixed  resolution  to  act  solely  in  accord- 
ance with  the  precepts  of  justice.  Christian  charity,  and 
peace,  both  in  their  own  internal  affairs  and  in  their  rela- 
tions with  other  rulers.  To  this  agreement  the  British 
government  was  unwilling  to  assent,  since  British  states- 
men considered  the  scheme  to  be  visionary  and  vague,  and 
because  they  objected  to  an  agreement  which  would  bind 
the  contracting  parties  always  to  give  each  other  aid  and 
assistance,  and  which  would  establish  things  as  they  were, 
and  obstruct  desirable  changes  in  the  future. 

This  Holy  Alliance,  as  it  was  called,  embodied  rather 
the  dream  of  the  Tsar  than  anything  in  the  practical  poli- 
tics of  the  age.  y  In  the  popular  mind  it  was  soon  confused 
with  the  Quadruple  Alliance,  also  concluded  about  that 
time.  3  This  latter,  as  will  be  seen,  stood  for  perpetuating 
the  status  quo,  the  settlement  made  at  Vienna,  and  uphold- 
ing as  much  of  the  old  order  as  had  there  been  established; 
in  short,  for  repression  and  reaction.  So  the  Holy  Alliance 
— which  at  the  start  received  some  sort  of  adherence  from 
all  the  governments  of  Europe,  except  the  Vatican  and 
the  Porte,  but  which  was  nevertheless  derided  by  some 
and  not  seriously  considered  by  others,  and  which  from  the 
start  had  almost  no  force — -was  regarded  for  a  generation 
after  that  time  as  a  symbol  of  tyranny,  a  device,  hidden 
under  religious   guise,  to   keep  European   peoples  from 


Alexander's 
design 


Great 
Britain 
refuses 
assent 


Effects  of 
the  Holy 
Alliance 


100 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


r 


The  Quad- 
ruple 
Alliance 
1815 


Purpose 


f\ 


Spirit  of 
reaction  in 
Europe 


attaining  the  liberty  and  national  development  which 
they  desired. '  And  yet,  we  can  see  now  that  some  of  the 
objections  made  in  1815  were  curiously  like  those  made 
to  the  League  of  Nations  in  1919;  and  that  a  hundred  years 
ago  a/project  for  the  betterment  of  relations  between  gov- 
ernments and  applying  better  principles  of  morality  to  the 
conduct  of  states,  failed  largely  because  of  the  selfishness 
of  diplomats  and  the  imperfection  of  peoples^ 
{  An  alliance  of  Great  Britain,  Russia,  Austria,  and  Prus- 
sia had  been  made  at  Chaumont  in  1814,  by  which  the 
parties  had  pledged  themselves  to  cooperate  until  Napo- 
leon was  completely  overthrown.  This  union,  had  been 
threatened  with  dissolution  at  Vienna  because  of  the 
quarrels  over  Saxony  and  Poland,  but  the  reappearance  of 
Napoleon  had  strengthened  it  again,  and  there  seemed  to 
be  much  necessity  of  retaining  it  to  deal  with  any  other 
effort  which  the  French  people  might  make  against  Europe. 
/  Accordingly,  at  Paris,  November  20,  1815,  the  four  powers 
signed  a  new  treaty  of  alliance.  Its  avowed  purpose  was 
to  employ  concerted  action  against  any  further  outbreak  of 
Revolutionary  principles,  to  secure  the  tranquillity  of 
Europe  by  maintaining  the  settlement  just  made  in  France, 
and  in  the  future  to  uphold  the  arrangements  which  its 
members  had  made/i  From  the  point  of  view  of  those 
who  had  made  the  arrangements  it  was  most  proper  that 
they  should  do  this.  But  since  they  represented  the  past 
much  more  than  the  future,  and  because  their  work,  had 
it  succeeded,  would  have  fatally  checked  some  of  the  most 
important  movements  of  the  nineteenth  century  in  after 
days  when  these  great  movements  were  accomplished, 
then  the  work  of  the  statesmen  who  framed  this  alliance 
seemed  baleful  and  inauspicious. 

In  1814  and  1815,  as  might  have  been  expected,  a  full 
tide  of  reaction  set  in.  Some  small  and  dull  leaders  w^ould 
have  liked  to  put  back  things  where  they  had  been  in 
1789.  ^  Indeed,  some  ridiculous  things  were  done,  though 


M 


11 


GEMtRAL  DRAFTING  CO  INC  N  Y 


4.    EUR 


& 


^•N 


o  Moscow 

R     U     S     S      I 


arsaw 

est       y  ^«  Odessa 
RY    \     1^ 

Bucharest 


IJ  1815 


THE  CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA      101 


they  had  but  small,  temporary  effect.  Little  princes  came 
back  to  their  petty  domains  to  set  up  what  had  been  there 
before  the  Revolution  and  Napoleon  drove  them  away. 
It  was  said  of  them  and  some  others  that  they  had  "learned 
nothing  and  forgotten  nothing."  Vaccination  and  other 
"French  improvements"  made  in  late  \  years  were 
put  aside;  in  north  Italy  serfdom  was  reestablished; 
and  in  Spain  and  Rome  the  Inquisition  once'raore  ajU' 
peared. 

The  statesmen  and  important  rulers  did  not  busy  them- 
selves with  the  accomplishing  of  such  things,  but  they  fully 
concurred  in  trying  to  set  up  firmly  again  what  seemed 
wise,  and  normal  and  proper.  All  of  them  represented 
conservatism  and  a  desire  that  there  should  be  no  further 
revolution  and  no  more  great  change.  They  had  long 
struggled  against  the  French  ideas,  which  had  originally 
involved  such  innovations  as  equality  of  the  people  and 
government  based  on  the  people  themselves,  but  which 
had  degenerated  into  wild  excesses,  which  had  presently 
failed,  which  had  then  seemed  to  prepare  the  way  for  the 
rise  of  a  great  military  despotism,  and  presently  changed 
into  a  danger  which  had  threatened  to  overthrow  the  rights 
of  all  the  established  governments  in  Europe.  Now  these 
governments  had  triumphed  after  a  long  and  exhausting 
struggle,  and  they  meant  to  make  safe  that  which  they 
regarded  as  best.  Russia,  Austria,  and  Prussia  were 
autocracies  in  which  the  sovereign  still  ruled  by  divine 
right  with  unlimited  power.  France  now  had  a  constitu- 
tion, but  divine  right  remained  and  the  spirit  of  the 
rulers  was  very  conservative.  England  had  long  been  a 
limited  monarchy,  but  her  government  was  in  the  hands 
of  aristocracy  and  upper  class,  conservative,  and  very  cau- 
tious, by  instinct.  :  It  was  therefore  the  desire  of  the 
leaders  who  made  the  Quadruple  Alliance,  and  of  France 
who  was  presently  admitted  into  their  councils,  that  the 
Revolutionary  era  be  definitely  ended,  and  that  a  great 


Conserva- 
tism  of    the 
leaders 


Desire  to 
conserve 
the  old 
order 


102 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  Concert 
of  Europe 


part  of  the  previous  order  of  things  being  now  restored,  no 
further  revolutionary  change  should  be  allowedtJ 
/    In  this  way  developed  the  Concert  of  Europe,  an  agree- 
ment of  the  principal  powers  to  work  together  for  the 
management  of  European  affairs>     The  sixth  article  of  the 
,    treaty  of  aUir^nce  had  provided  that  the  high  contracting 
.   parties  siiould  thereafter  hold  meetings  from  time  to  tim^J 
:  'tO;  cj6nsjder  measures  salutary  for  "the  peace  and  pros- 
perity of  the  nations,  and  for  the  maintenance  of  the  peace 
of  Europe."     Four  such  meetings  were  held  in  the  next 
eight  years,  and  during  the  period  1815  to  1823  Europe  was 
directed  by  the  great  powers  acting  in  concert. 

First  was  the  Congress  of  Aix-la-Chapelle  in  1818.] 
Little  as  the  lesser  powers  liked  a  dictatorship  and  suprem- 
acy of  the  greater  ones,  this  Congress  was  generally  looked 
upon  as  the  supreme  council  of  Europe,  and  they  brought 
many  things  before  it  for  decision.  Little  difficulty  was 
caused  by  what  they  submitted.  Nor  was  there  disagree- 
ment about  evacuating  France,  nor  admitting  France  into 
the  Alliance,  after  which  five  great  powers  controlled 
Europe.  But  real  differences  soon  developed.  In  order 
to  break  up  the  slave  trade  Great  Britain  proposed  that 
the  different  states  should  have  the  right  to  search  one 
another's  ships  at  sea;  this  failed  because  the  others  were 
jealous  of  England's  superior  sea-power.  On  the  other 
hand  Great  Britain  successfully  resisted  Russia's  proposal 
to  maintain  an  international  fleet  to  stamp  out  the  Barbary 
pirates,  since  she  had  no  trouble  with  them  now  herself, 
and  wished  to  see  no  new  naval  power  in  the  Mediterra- 
The  European  states  were  no  more  willing  to  sacri- 


nean. 


fice  their  particular  interests  in  1818  than  the  United  States 
in  1918  was  willing  to  give  up  her  Monroe  Doctrine  for 
the  sake  of  a  league  of  nations. 
^    Two  years  later,  a  second  congress  was  held  at  Troppau, 


in  Austria,  which  was  adjourned  in  the  following  year  to 
Laibach,  near  by.     In  1820  revolutions  had  broken  out  in 


THE  CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA      103 

Spain  and  then  in  Naples  against  the  reactionary  sov- 
ereigns there.  1  Ferdinand  of  Naples  appealed  for  assis- 
tance, and  Austria  wished  not  only  to  intervene,  but  to 
have  the  sanction  of  the  Allies  in  doing  it.  Metternich 
was  greatly  strengthened  at  this  time  by  the  adhesion  of 
Alexander  of  Russia,  who  had  formerly  desired  to  be  a 
liberal,  but  who  was  influenced  now  by  certain  events  to 
join  the  forces  of  reaction.  At  Troppau,  Great  Britain, 
France,  Russia,  Austria,  and  Prussia  were  represented. 
{There  Metternich  proposed  his  doctrine  that  the  great 
powers  should  refuse  to  recognize  as  legal  any  changes 
brought  about  in  a  state  by  revolution,  and  should  inter- 
vene to  restore  conditions  which  had  been  altered  by  revo- 
lutionary changes.  Great  Britain  opposed  this  doctrine, 
but  it  was  accepted  by  Russia,  Austria,  and  Prussia,  and 
embodied  in  the  Protocol  of  Troppau ;  States  which  have  Revolution 
undergone  a  change  of  Government  due  to  revolution,  the  proscribed 
results  of  which  threaten  other  States,  ipso  facto  cease  to 
be  members  of  the  European  Alliance.  ...  If ,  owing 
to  such  alterations,  immediate  danger  threatens  other 
States,  the  Powers  bind  themselves,  by  peaceful  means, 
or  if  need  be  by  arms,  to  bring  back  the  guilty  State  into 
the  bosom  of  the  Great  Alliance."  To  such  intervention 
England  was  strongly  opposed,  for  conservative  as  her 
government  was  then,  it  was  liberal  compared  with  those 
of  central  and  eastern  Europe.  Actually  she  was  about  to 
separate  from  the  European  Concert,  and  go  her  own 
course,  while  France,  also  comparatively  liberal,  was 
shortly  to  drift  away  from  the  Alliance  also.  But  for  the. 
time  being  Metternich's  ideas  were  carried  out,  for  in  1821,  j 
after  Ferdinand  had  been  summoned  to  the  Congress  at 
Laibach,  he  was  restored  to  his  throne  despite  the  opposi- 
tion of  his  Neapolitan  subjects.  In  that  year  also  there 
was  a  revolution  against  absolutism  in  Piedmont,  but 
Russia  and  Austria  made  ready  to  stamp  it  out,  and  soon 
it  collapsed. 


104 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


In  1822  the  last  of  the  congresses  met  at  Verona.  In 
Spain  revolutionists  had  extorted  a  constitution  from 
Ferdinand  VII,  their  weak  and  odious  king.]  He  had 
appealed  to  the  rulers  of  the  Allied  Powers,  and  now  at 
Verona  France,  Russia,  Austria,  and  Prussia,  demanded 
that  the  king's  prerogatives  be  restored.     The  Spaniards 

.  refused,  and  though  England  strongly  protested,  the  other 
allies  prepared  to  coerce  the  king's  disobedient  subjects. 

[  France,  temporarily  directed  by  reactionaries,  was  com- 
missioned to  do  the  work,  and  a  French  army  entering 
Spain,  easily  overcame  all  resistance,  after  which  there  was 
a  cruel  and  shameful  proscription  and  reign  of  terror.  It  is 
well  known  that  the  "Holy  Alliance,"  desired  also  to  re- 
store to  reactionary  Spain  her  revolted  American  colonies. 
But  England,  in  command  of  the  sea,  was  able  to  interpose 
effectual  resistance,  and  the  government  of  the  United 
States  also  announced  unalterable  opposition  in  the  so- 
called  Monroe  Doctrine;  and  the  project  was  quietly 
dropped. 

The  collapse  of  the  European  Concert  began  with  the 
withdrawal  of  England  in  1823.  After  the  Revolution  of 
1830  France  also  drew  far  away  from  the  policy  which  had 
dictated  intervention  in  Piedmont  and  Spain.  The 
scheme  had  begun  in  1814  with  the  desire  to  preserve  from 
another  outburst  of  the  French  people  what  the  Allies  had 
so  far  saved  by  a  great  deal  of  effort  and  fighting.  It  had 
broadened  into  the  design  of  maintaining  order  and  tran- 
quillity in  a  Europe  where  peace  and  quiet  were  sorely 
needed.  But  as  the  forces  of  reaction  and  extreme  con- 
servatism presently  attempted  to  use  the  Alliance  for  the 
purpose  of  preventing  all  revolution  and  change,  funda- 
mental differences  developed  between  England  and  France 
on  the  one  hand  and  on  the  other  the  conservative  and 
stationary  central  and  eastern  powers,  where  the  influence 
of  the  French  Revolution  had  been  felt  not  so  much  or 
not  at  all.     Moreover, 'none  of  the  powers  were  willing  to 


THE  CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA      105 


make  any  substantial  sacrifice  of  their  peculiar  interests 
for  the  good  of  all  Europe.  Therefore  the  Alliance  or 
Concert  soon  broke  up;  England  dropped  out  and  pres- 
ently France.  After  a  while  there  was  no  longer  any 
great  alliance  dominating  all  Europe  as  in  the  years  from 
1815  to  1823,  though  Russia,  Austria,  and  Prussia  long 
acted  in  much  unison,  based  on  the  similarity  of  their 
governments,  their  proximity  to  each  other,  and  often  their 
identity  of  interests,  which  to  a  considerable  extent 
persisted  throughout  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. 

But  even  though  this  Concert  of  the  Powers  was  broken 
up,  the  example  remained,  and  from  time  to  time  there- 
after, affairs  of  general  concern  were  settled  at  meetings 
of  representatives  of  some  of  the  powers.  Twice  more 
during  the  nineteenth  century  great  congresses  were  held, 
at  Paris  in  1856,  and  at  Berlin  in  1878,  to  settle  European 
affairs;  and  there  were  several  others  less  important.  In 
the  closing  years  of  the  century  there  was  an  informal 
association  of  the  Great  Powers,  in  a  European  Concert, 
to  deal  with  the  dangerous  and  perplexing  affairs  of  Turkey 
and  the  Balkans.  In  1913  such  a  meeting  was  held  at 
London  to  deal  with  the  Balkan  troubles,  and  such  a 
conference  was  proposed  by  England  in  the  days  just 
before  the  World  War,  in  a  last  vain  effort  to  avert  the 
conflict. 
/  For  some  time  after  the  Congress  of  Vienna  the  dominat- 
ing  and  guiding  spirit  in  Continental  affairs  was  the  Aus- 
trian minister,  Prince  Metternich.  His  influence  was  so 
powerful  and  persistent  that  to  a  great  extent  the  period 
from  1815  to  1848  is  Metternich's  era.  He  stood  for  what 
he  believed  was  a  sane,  wise,  and  proper  condition  of 
affairs.  He  had  lived  through  the  violence  and  fluctua- 
tions of  the  Revolutionary  period,  and  risen  to  greatness 
during  the  years  of  Napoleon's  power.  When  the  Corsi- 
can  had  been  sent  to  Elba,  Metternich  appeared  at  Vienna 


Later 
Concert 
of  the 
Powers 


The  age  of 
Metternich 


106 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


A 


Metternich' 
spirit  and 
s 


At  the 
Congress 
of  Vienna 


His  system 
in  central 
Europe 


^  National 
aspirations 
disregarded 


desiring  restoration  of  most  of  what  had  been  and  resis- 
tance to  any  further  change.  He  was  descended  from  an 
ancient  and  noble  family,  and,  both  by  temperament  and 
training,  represented  aristocracy  in  social  arrangements 
and  the  Old  Regime  in  governmental  affairs.  He  was  too 
astute  a  statesman  to  believe,  as  did  some  lesser  men,  that 
things  could  everywhere  be  restored  to  what  they  once  had 
been ;  but  now/that  the  Revolution  was  over  and  Napoleon 
put  out  of  the  way,  he  hoped  that  no  further  innovations 
would  be  made,  and  that  political  arrangements  decided  at 
Vienna  would  be  upheld  by  the  masters  who  had  made 
them.  /  He  desired  very  much  to  maintain  Austria  as  the 
leader  of  Euroge^  (In  the  arrangements  at  Vienna,  he  and 
his  associates  thought  it  well  to  abandon  Belgium,  which 
was  far  away  and  hard  to  defend,  as  well  as  Austrian 
possessions  in  western  Germany,  so  that  nowhere  should 
Austria  be  in  contact  with  France.  He  opposed  the  ac- 
quisition of  Saxony  by  Prussia,  lest  that  state  become  too 
great  a  rival;  and  to  preserve  the  leadership  of  Austria 
among  the  German  states,  he  successfully  opposed  all  at- 
tempts to  make  any  real  German  union.  Prussia,  under 
a  weak  ruler  was  no  serious  rival.  After  a  while  Russia 
also  acted  in  harmony  with  Metternich's  wishes^ 

(  But  his  greatest  efforts  were  expended  in  preserving  the 
order  of  things  now  established.  He  believed,  as  he  said, 
that  sovereigns  ought  to  guide  the  destinies  of  their  people, 
and  that  they  were  responsible  to  God  alonej^ ' "  Govern- 
ment is  no  more  a  subject  for  debate  than  religion  is." 

CHc  had  no  sympathy  with  ideas  of  nationality,  democracy, 
and  civil  equalityj,  which  he  believed  to  be  pernicious  and 
wrong,  and  he  determined  to  keep  them,  now  that  they 
existed  in  Europe,  within  as  narrow  bounds  as  could  be. 
The  national  risings  of  the  people  of  Spain  and  Prussia 
had  just  made  it  possible  for  Austria  to  escape  from  sub- 
jection(  but  Spain  was  put  back  under  the  despotic  rule  of 
the  Bourbons; (the  German  people  were  not  allowed  to 


THE  CONGRESS  OF  VIENNA       107 

unite,  but  were  left  under  the  absolute  rule  of  their  princes; 
while  the  Italians  were  kept  disunited,  and  put  under  the 
yoke  of  native  despots  or  foreign  masters.  Austria  had 
scarcely  been  affected  by  the  French  Revolution,  as  the 
German  states  had  been,;  and  it  was  easy  now  for  Metter- 
nich,  by  mea'ns  of  repressive  laws,  drastic  censorship  of  the 
press^  and  far-reaching  espionage,  to  prevent  any  more  new 
ideas  getting  across  the  frontier.  His  influence  brought 
it  about  that  this  repressive  and  reactionary  system  was 
also  maintained  in  the  neighboring  German  states;  and  for 
some  time  his  ideas  were  successfully  upheld  in  the  Italian 
lands.  ,. ' 

(  Metternich*s  system  was  shaken  by  the  events  in  Spain  Fall  of  his 
and  in  Italy  in  1820,  and  much  more  by  the  revolutions  in  ^y^*®"* 
France  in  1830,  and  in  Belgium,  in  Poland,  and  in  various 
parts  of  Germany  and  of  Italy  about  the  same  time.  On 
each  occasion  the  revolution  was  crushed,  excepting  in 
Belgium  and  in  France,  which  now  broke  definitely  with 
the  old  system.y  But  all  the  time,  everywhere  in  Europe, 
save  in  Russia  and  the  southeastern  lands,  progress  of  the 
Industrial  Revolution  and  the  rise  of  a  middle  class  were 
undermining  the  system  of  things  which  he  loved. ^  Finally 
came  the  Year  of  Revolutions,  1848,  when  all  through  Revolutions 
western  and  central  Europe  the  order  which  he  had  sup- 
ported went  crashing  down,  and  he  himself  fled  from 
Vienna  to  England,  j  Times  had  greatly  changed,  but  he 
was  too  much  identified  with  the  older  days  to  alter  him- 
self. "My  mind  has  never  entertained  error,"  he  said  in 
1848.  In  after  times  his  memory  was  execrated,  and  he 
was  condemned,  too  harshly,  perhaps.  Partly  because 
of  his  efforts  most  of  Europe  had  peace  for  a  generation 
after  Napoleon's  wars,  and  peace  she  then  needed  even 
more  than  political  progress.  Metternich  represented, 
moreover,  the  instincts  of  conservatism,  of  law  and  order, 
and  of  natural  reaction  against  the  too-great  changes  of 
the  revolutionary  epoch!     But  his  system  made  improve- 


of  1848 


108  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

ment  impossible,  and  its  downfall  was  necessary  for  the 
progress  of  Europe. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

C.  K.  Webster,  The  Congress  of  Vienna^  18U-1815  (19J8), 
excellent;  Three  Peace  Congresses  of  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1917), 
in  which  the  Congresses  of  Vienna,  Paris,  and  Berlin  are  de- 
scribed respectively  by  C.  D.  Hazen,  W.  R.  Thayer,  and 
R.  H.  Lord.  Aden  des  Wiener  Kongr esses  (ed.  by  J.  L.  Kluber), 
8  vols.  (2d  ed.  1817-35);  W.  A.  Phillips,  The  Confederation  of 
Europe  (2d  ed.  1919);  G.  B.  Malleson,  Life  of  Prince  Metter- 
nich  (1895);  Prince  Metternich-Winneburg,  MSmoires,  8  vols. 
(1880-4),  also  in  Enghsh;  Memoirs  cf  Prince  Clemens  Metter- 
nich  (ed.  by  Prince  R.  Metternich,  trans,  by  Mrs.  A.  Napier), 
5  vols.  (1881-2);  C.  M.  de  Talleyrand-Perigord,  MSmmres, 
5  vols.  (1891-2),  also  translation  of;  Correspondance  Inedite  de 
Talleyrand  et  du  Roi  Louis  XVIII  pendant  le  Congres  de  Vienne 
(ed.  by  G.  Pallain,  3d  ed.  1881);  Friedrich  von  Gentz,  Tage- 
biicher,  4  vols.  (1873-4);  Lord  Castlereagh,  Memmrs  and  Corres- 
pondence, 12  vols.  (1848-53);  Duke  of  Wellington,  DespatcheSy 
12  vols.  (1837-9) ;  A.  Sorel,  Essais  d'Histoire  et  de  Critique,  12th 
ed.  (1884)  contains  accounts  of  Metternich  and  Talleyrand. 


m 


:..#^^*.? 

m^-^:^^ 


CHAPTER    VI 
THE    INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 

CThe  essence  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  is  the  substitution  of  com- 
petition for  the  mediaeval  regulations  which  had  previously  con- 
trolled the  production  and  distribution  of  wealth.  On  this  account 
it  is  not  only  one  of  the  most  important  facts  of  English  history, 
but  Europe  owes  to  it  the  growth  of  two  great  systems  of  thought. 
— Economic  Science,  and  its  antithesis.  Socialism. ) 

Arnold  Toynbee,  Lectures  on  the  Industrial  Revolution,  p.  85. 
(1884). 

De  la  revolution  economique  operee  en  Angleterre.     .     .     . 

Tandis  que  la  revolution  frangaise  faisait  ses  grandes  experiences 
sociales  sur  un  volcan,  1' Angleterre  commengait  les  siennes  sur  le 
terrain  de  I'industrie.  La  fin  du  dix-huitieme  siecle  y  etait  signa- 
lee  par  des  decouvertes  admirables,  destinees  a  changer  la  face  du 
monde  et  a  accroltre  d'une  maniere  inesperee  la  puissance  de  leurs 
inventeurs.  Les  conditions  du  travail  subissaient  la  plus  profonde 
modification  qu'elles  aient  eprouvee  depuis  I'origine  des  societes. 
Adolphe  Blanqui,  Histoire  de  I'Economie  Politique  en  Europe, 
ii.  207  (1837). 

"  Life  in  many  parts  of  Europe  and  elsewhere  at  the  be-     slowness  of 
ginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  was  strikingly  different     change  in 
from  what  it  was  a  hundred  years  later.  ^'^There  was  no     *^®  P^^* 
such  enormous  difference  between  the  eighteenth  century 
and  the  seventeenth,  or  between  the  seventeenth  and  the 
sixteenth,  or  even  between  the  sixteenth  and  the  tenth  or 
the  fifth.     In  the  slow  course  of  these  centuries  there  had 
been  vast  changes  in  political  and  governmental  affairs,') 
states  had  risen  and  fallen,  old  religions  had  changed  and 
new  ones  appeared,  great  literatures  had  flowered,  philos- 

109 


change 


110  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

ophies  had  been  explained  and  discarded,  and  men  had 
come  to  think  of  the  universe  in  a  w,ay  their  ancestors 
would  scarcely  have  conceived  of;  yet  during  all  the 
time  of  the  Christian  Era,  and  for  a  great  while  before, 
there  had  been  few  changes  in  the  way  that  most  people 
lived  their  lives. 

Previous         ^   The  Renaissance,  slowly  maturing  for  some  hundreds  of 
^Ko«««  °  years,  had  stirred  and  quickened  men's  minds,  and  in  the 

wonderful  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  opened  up 
immense  new  realms  of  enjoyment  and  thoughtj  There 
seemed  to  be  lovelier  things  in  the  world  now,  the  great- 
ness and  charm  of  the  past  were  known  better  to  some,  and 
new  writings  of  strange  and  wondrous  beauty  appeared; 
but  most  men  and  women  found  the  ordinary  conditions 
of  life  scarcely  altered.  (The  period  of  the  Reformation — 
when  ideas  of  religion  and  church,  of  Pope  and  bishops, 
of  Bible  and  church  ceremonies  were  altered  or  retained^- 
brought  to  the  people  of  western  and  central  Europe  for 
more  than  a  hundred  years  a  time  of  mental  uncertainty 
and  stress  scarcely  to  be  conceived  of  now,  and  people 
presently  found  their  mental  and  religious  world  so  much 
altered  that  things  could  never  be  again  as  before..  But 
still  men  made  their  living  and  spent  most  of  their  lives 
much  the  same  way  as  in  the  past.  The  French  Revolu- 
tion brought  enormous  changes;  but  the  men  who  now 
spoke  of  democracy,  believed  in  liberty,  fraternity,  and 
equality,  and  whose  laws  were  passed  by  elected  legisla- 
tures, continued  to  make  their  living  and  spend  their  lives 
much  as  men  had  done  before. )  ' 

^  At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  most  people 
in  Europe  made  their  living  in  agriculture,  by  long,  hard 
work,  using  plows  and  tools  like  those  which  had  served  for 
a  thousand  years^^  They  dwelt  in  small,  ill-heated,  poorly 
ventilated  houses.  They  did  some  manufacturing,  or  work 
with  their  hands,  spinning,  weaving,  and  the  many  things 
that  go  to  supply  men  and  women  with  what  they  must 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       111 


have.  Much  manufacturing  and  trading  were  carried  on 
in  the  cities  and  towns,  where  Hving  conditions  were  better 
for  more  people;  but  still  the  manufacturing  was  usually 
done  in  the  midst  of  the  family,  in  little  houses,  or  in  a  few 
rooms  of  some  tenement,  with  simple  tools  and  by  pro- 
cesses which  had  come  down  scarcely  changed  through 
generations.  The  conditions  in  which  most  of  these 
people  lived  can  best  be  realized  now  by  going  to  some 
small  village,  isolated  and  off  from  the  currents  of  modern 
progress,  to  which  the  changes  of  the  past  hundred  years 
have  scarcely  come  yet.  In  village  or  in  town  then  people 
got  their  water  from  spring  or  pump,  and  there  could  be 
little  washing  and  cleanliness  of  person.  In  winter  the 
diet  was  monotonous  and  meager,  for  there  was  yet  no 
canning  and  preserving,  and  usually  meat  could  be  kept 
only  by  salting.  Most  people  never  had  coal  for  heating; 
there  was  no  steam  heat;  people  wrapped  up  in  their 
warmest  clothes  to  keep  warm  at  night  or  else  went  early  to 
bed.  There  was  no  electric  illumination;  streets  in  the 
cities  were  generally  dangerous  and  ill-lighted  at  night, 
and  houses  were  shrouded  in  gloom  unless  the  inhabitants 
could  afford  to  buy  lamps  or  candles.  There  were  no 
railroads,  no  steamships,  no  telegraphs,  no  telephones. 
Travel  by  horse  or  by  stage-coach  and  communication  by 
messenger  or  dilatory  post  were  so  slow  and  uncertain 
that  most  people  never  traveled  far,  and  outside  of  the 
few  large  cities  people  remained  ignorant  of  what  went 
on  at  a  distance,  or  only  learned  of  passing  events  a  long 
while  after  they  happened.  There  was,  indeed,  not  a 
little  of  comfortable,  splendid  living,  with  so  much  beauty 
and  grace,  that  we  love  to  look  back  upon  it  now  and  try 
to  recall  it;  but  this  was  only  for  the  few.  Most  people 
had  no  share  in  it,  and  never  could  hope  to  have.  Not 
only  did  they  have  few  of  the  things  now  taken  as  a  matter 
of  course,  but,  however  they  strove,  they  could  not  hope 
greatly  to  better  themselves,  for,  working  as  they  did  then 


Things  now 
common 
then 
wantmg 


112 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


with  rude  appliances  and  without  machines,  alone  in  their 
homes,  with  little  cooperation  or  division  of  labor,  it  was 
not  possible  ever  to  produce  much  more  than  was  needed 
for  a  bare  subsistence.^  So  it  had  been  in  ancient  times; 
so  it  continued  to  be  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  nine- 
teenth century.  Then  at  last  began  changes  so  profound 
that  for  many  people  conditions  of  living  were  altogether 
altered;  and  presently  began  immense  social  changes  and 
new  problems,  enormous  and  baffling! 
/At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  in  Great  Britain, 
and  during  the  course  of  the  next  hundred  years  in  much 
of  the  rest  of  Europe,  there  began  a  change,  which  after- 
ward men  saw  as  the  most  important  revolution  in  his- 
torical times.  A  series  of  great  inventions  came,  which 
presently  resulted  in  most  things  being  made  by  machinery 
instead  of  by  hand,  so  that  the  word  "manufacturing"  came 
to  have  a  meaning  fundamentally  different  from  before.,^ 
These  machines,  which  did  the  work  better  and  more 
quickly  than  had  ever  been  possible  by  hand,  were  pres- 
ently operated  by  power  of  water  or  steam,  after  which 
they  produced  manufactured  things  in  immensely  greater 
quantities  than  before,  so  that  presently  there  was  a  larger 
quantity  and  surplus  of  things  than  ever  previously  in  the 
history  of  the  world.  All  this  would  have  involved  im- 
mense change  in  the  condition  of  people,  but  other  circum- 
stances which  immediately  arose  altered  the  very  structure 
and  organization  of  society.  (  Previously  men  and  women 
had  labored  in  their  own  homes  or  the  fields  about  them; 
now  they  went  out  to  do  industrial  work  in  large  numbers 
together.  Then  they  had  worked  for  themselves;  now 
they  worked  for  wages  which  some  capitalist  paid.  Once 
manufacturing  and  conditions  of  labor  had  beeH-t5arefully 
regulated  by  governments  or  guilds;  now  the  conditions 
were  left  to  adjust  themselves.  The  changes  brought 
about  by  all  this  were  for  a  long  time  only  partly  under- 
stood. /But  when  a  hundred  years  had  gone  by  and  men 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       113 


appraised  the  alterations  which  had  slowly  taken  place, 
they  began  to  understand  clearly  that  the  nineteenth 
century  marked  off,  more  than  any  which  had  gone  before 
it,  an  old  world  from  anew,  and  that  the  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion still  promised  changes  which  might  affect  all  govern- 
ment and  social  life. 
/^  It  was  in  Great  Britain  that  the  most  important  changes 


of  the  Industrial  Revolution  began.  The  seventeenth  and 
the  eighteenth  centuries  were  for  all  of  western  Europe  a 
period  of  great  intellectual  and  scientific  activity,  i  Ger- 
mans, Frenchmen,  Italians,  Dutchmen,  as  well  as  men  of 
Scotland  and  England,  busied  themselves  with  study  of 
the  world  about  them,  and  there  were  many  great  scien- 
tific discoveries  and  inventions.  During  this  period  many 
men  understood  that  the  earth  revolved  about  the  sun, 
that  the  blood  circulated  through  the  body,  and  believed 
that  all  things  attracted  each  other  in  proportion  to  their 
mass  and  their  nearness;  it  was  also  in  this  period  that 
telescopes,  microscopes,  clocks  with  pendulums,  and  not 
a  few  rude  machines  first  came  into  use.  Some  peoples 
necessarily  lagged  behind.  German  lands  were  ruined  and 
long  blighted  by  the  wars  of  religion,  while  the  various 
German  states  were  not  able  to  unite  and  give  their  people 
the  prosperity  of  union  and  strength.  Italians  remained 
disunited  and  under  the  yoke  of  foreign  masters,  and  then, 
as  later,  they  lacked  the  material  resources  for  considerable 
advance.  Holland  was  small  and  her  citizens  gave  them- 
selves above  all  to  commerce  and  colonial  development. 
There  was  notable  progress  in  France,  but  Frenchmen  were 
involved  in  continuous  and  costly  wars  with  the  neighbors 
who  touched  their  frontiers,  while  they  too  were  seen  after 
a  while  to  lack  some  of  the  basic  resources.  None  the  less, 
France  and  Holland  especially  were  slowly  going  along 
the  same  road  the  British  people  were  traversing. 
P  But  it  was  especially  in  Great  Britain  that  conditions 
favored  large  change.     There  a  strong  and  settled  govern- 


Beginning 
of  the 
Industrial 
Revolution 
in  western 
Europe   I 


France 


In  Great 
Britain 


114 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Mechanical 
invention 


Inventions 
in  the 
textile 
industry 


ment  had  long  existed  together  with  greater  freedom  for 
the  individual  and  less  of  the  old  restrictions  made  by  guild 
officials  or  lords  of  the  manor.  For  more  than  a  hundred 
years  British  commerce  had  developed,  bringing  much 
wealth  into  the  country,  and  creating  a  large  class  of  eager, 
ambitious  leaders  and  adventurous  men  with  keen  minds. 
The  habits  and  temperament  of  the  people  had  disposed 
men  to  apply  themselves  more  to  making  things  work 
in  actual  practice  than  to  speculative  philosophy  and  ar- 
tistic creation.  Though  English  poetry  and  prose  writing 
had  developed  into  the  greatest  of  modem  literatures,  the 
people  of  Britain  had  failed  to  make  any  signal  contribution 
to  music  or  sculpture  and  had  not  made  much  to  painting; 
but  some  devoted  themselves  eagerly  to  scientific  study, 
especially  to  the  practical  application  of  science.  Men, 
whose  names  are  forgotten  now,  labored  to  make  machines 
that  would  pump  water  from  mines  or  dredge  the  bottoms 
of  swamps  or  rivers,  boats  to  sail  faster,  or  devices  for  doing 
work  more  quickly  or  more  cheaply.  In  the  Public  Record 
Office  in  London  are  many  manuscripts  with  rude  drawings 
of  machines  upon  which  the  inventor  desired  to  take 
a  patent  or  for  which  he  wanted  government  help.  So, 
after  many  failures  and  by  slow  degrees  were  perfected  the 
engines  that  ran  by  steam  and  the  machines  that  took 
the  work  from  men's  hands;  for  neither  the  steam  engine, 
the  railway  train,  the  steamboat,  nor  numerous  other 
things,  were  suddenly  perfected,  but  were  often  the  prod- 
ucts of  long  and  painful  evolution. 

[  In  the  eighteenth  century  a  series  of  inventions  brought 
about  a  great  change  in  England.  The  first  of  them  con- 
cerned the  clothing  industry,^  which  up  to  that  time  had 
depended  upon  slow,  patient,  laborious  work.  Most  cloth 
then  was  made  of  wool,  though  silk  had  long  been  used  for 
the  wealthy,  and  for  some  time  cotton,  brought  from  Asia 
and  the  new  American  lands,  had  been  growing  in  favor. 
Wool,  silk,  or  cotton,  the  fibers  had  to  be  slowly  arranged 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       115 


and  patiently  spun  into  thread,  and  the  threads  woven 
by  hand  into  cloth.  By  such  devices  there  could  never 
be  much  cloth  produced,  and  the  generality  of  men  wore 
what  clothes  they  had  as  long  as  they  could.  In  1738  a 
certain  John  Kay  invented  the  "  jfly-shuttle "  with  which 
weavers  could  make  cloth  more  quickly  than  before.  But 
as  the  thread  was  still  produced  largely  by  women  working 
at  the  old  spinning-wheels,  with  one  wheel  turned  by  mo- 
tion of  the  foot,  not  enough  thread  could  be  spun  to  let  the 
weaviers  work  faster.  C  A  generation  later,  about  1770, 
James  Hargreaves,  a  weaver  of  Lancashire,  completed  an 
invention,  the  spinning  jenny  or  engine,  by  which  a  num- 
ber of  wheels  could  be  turned  by  revolving  a  crank,  so  that 
one  person  could  now  spin  out  eight  threads  at  once.  Up 
to  this  point  in  the  textile  industry  simple  machines  had 
been  perfected  enabling  laborers  to  accomplish  more  with 
the  work  of  their  hands.  But  already  in  1769  Richard 
Arkwright,  a  successful  business  man,  began  applying 
water  power  to  spinning  devices  1  His  machines  were 
large  and  costly,  and  there  now  began  one  of  the  most 
significant  things  in  the  revolution.  Only  rich  men  could 
afford  to  have  the  machines,  and  once  having  them  could 
dispense  with  a  great  part  of  the  labor  of  employees,  while 
those  whom  they  did  require  had  to  work  for  them  in  fac- 
tories under  their  authority  and  direction.  Z'  Then  in  1779 
Samuel  Crompton,  using  the  inventions  of  Hargreaves 
and  Arkwright,  produced  the  "spinning-mule, '3  by  which 
much  more  thread  could  be  spun  than  ever  before;  and  in 
1785,  Edmund  Cartwright  succeeded  in  applying  water- 
power  to  a  weaving-machine,  and  it  was  soon  possible  for 
a  boy,  scantily  paid,  to  do  more  with  such  an  appliance 
than  three  skilled  weavers  without  it.  In  America,  Eli 
Whitney  invented  the  cotton  gin  or  engine  in  1792,  by 
which  cotton  could  be  separated  from  its  seeds  much 
more  quickly  than  ever  before.  The  result  was  that  huge 
supplies  of  cotton  were  soon  raised  and  picked  and  sent 


Application 
of  power  to 
machines 


116 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Pre- 
eminence 
Britain 


of 


Coal 


The  age  of 
steam 


to  England,  where  already  enormous  quantities  of  wool 
were  being  spun  and  woven,  and  Britain  became  beyond 
all  question  the  center  of  the  world's  spinning  and  weav- 
ing. 

One  might  think  that  these  inventions  would  have  been 
studied  and  then  copied  in  other  lands,  and  so  they  pres- 
ently were;  but  generally  foreigners  were  slow  to  interest 
themselves,  the  old  regulations  of  trade  and  industry  ham- 
pered the  adoption  of  new  devices  on  the  Continent,  and 
very  soon  came  the  Wars  of  the  Revolution  and  Napoleon, 
when  for  more  than  twenty  years,  outside  of  Britain,  Euro- 
peans gave  little  thought  to  industrial  development.  Bri- 
tain had  also  another  advantage  in  great  deposits  of  coal 
and  iron,  lying  near  to  each  other,  easily  got  and  used,  pres- 
ently applied  to  run  the  machines,  and  make  vaster  in- 
dustrial progress. 

For  a  long  time  men  had  dug  the  black  stones  of  north 
England  about  Newcastle,  and  sold  them  as  sea-coal  to  be 
burned  in  the  winter.  But  down  to  this  time  not  much 
had  been  mined  and  it  had  generally  been  used  as  fuel 
in  houses.  The  forges  and  small  furnaces  burned  wood, 
until  a  great  part  of  the  English  forests  had  been  consumed 
and  the  woods  of  Ireland  nearly  ruined.  In  the  eighteenth 
century,  however,  coal  began  to  be  used  for  the  smelting  of 
metals  and  to  get  power  for  running  machines,  and  soon 
the  age  of  steam  began. 

Rude  steam  engines  for  pumping  water  from  mines  were 
invented  at  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  there 
are  traditions  of  devices  much  earlier.  Improvements 
were  made  by  many  who  worked  upon  them,  especially  by 
Thomas  Newcomen  in  1705,  and  above  all  by  James  Watt, 
who  in  1769  began  making  improvements  which  are  prac- 
tically the  basis  of  the  modern  steam-engines.  Before  his 
time  they  had  been  used  only  for  pumping,  but  as  a  result 
of  his  improvements  they  were  applied  to  the  driving  of 
machines.    To  make  these  large,  heavy  engines  and  ma- 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       117 


chines  much  iron  was  needed  and  it  could  not  be  got 
without  a  great  quantity  of  fuel.  In  the  central  and 
northern  parts  of  the  island  large  iron  deposits  existed, 
with  vast  coal  fields  in  south  Wales  and  northern  England. 
So  in  the  vicinity  of  the  coal  deposits  blast-furnaces  ap- 
peared, and  huge  forges  and  rolling  mills,  beyond  anything 
ever  seen  before.  Great  quantities  of  powerful  tools  and 
machines  now  came  into  use,  making  possible  the  produc- 
tion of  a  still  greater  quantity  of  manufactured  goods. 

Not  only  industry  but  communication  was  altogether 
changed.  In  the  eighteenth  century  in  England  and  in 
France  roads  and  canals  had  been  improved  and  extended. 
In  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  many  efforts 
were  made  to  use  steam  engines  to  drive  boats  forward, 
and  this  culminated  with  the  work  of  the  American,  Robert 
Fulton,  in  1807,  Steamboats  now  moved  up  and  down 
rivers  and  along  coasts,  defying  current  and  tides,  and  after 
the  voyage  of  the  steamship  Great  Western  in  1838,  the 
ocean  could  be  crossed  in  two  weeks  instead  of  a  month. 
Meanwhile  efforts  were  being  made  to  have  engines  drive 
coaches  or  cars.  A  hundred  years  later  it  was  done  very 
differently  when  automobiles  were  invented.  The  appli- 
ances developed  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century 
were  far  clumsier  and  much  less  powerful,  and  the  problem 
was  solved  then  by  making  an  engine  drag  cars  along  rails 
laid  for  the  purpose.  Such  was  the  origin  of  the  railway. 
In  1808  Richard  Trevithick  ran  the  first  steam  engine 
along  a  railway  in  London,  and  in  1825  George  Stephenson 
perfected  a  more  powerful  locomotive.) 

The  history  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  in  Continental 
Europe  is  a  story  of  the  adoption,  imitation,  and  later  per- 
fection of  these  appliances  and  methods.  For  a  long  time 
Britain  remained  far  ahead.  She  was  in  the  earlier  part 
of  her  industrial  transformation  when  the  French  Revolu- 
tion began.  When  the  final  victory  over  Napoleon  came 
she  was  the  workshop  of  the  world,  and  as  supreme  in 


Commtini- 
cation  and 
transporta- 
tion 


Steamships 

and 

railways 


Great 

Britain  out- 
strips other 
cotmtries 


118 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

Industrial 
Revolution 
in  France 


In  central 
Europe 


In  the 

Gennan 

Empire 


industrialism  as  she  was  in  commercial  power.  For  a  time 
Europe,  exhausted  and  shaken,  found  it  easier  to  buy  from 
her  than  attempt  any  industrial  development,  but  pres- 
ently the  Industrial  Revolution  spread  from  England  to 
lands  near  by^' 

/^French  industry,  developing  more  slowly,  had  been 
greatly  checked  by  the  wars;  but  now  it  went  on  with  its 
expansion  after  the  time  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  and 
presently  a  new  generation  had  brought  into  France  the 
machines  and  the  methods  of  England.  In  Great  Britain 
the  new  industrialism  had  brought  such  profits  and  success 
that  agriculture  was  partly  abandoned,  and  by  the  latter 
part  of  the  nineteenth  century  most  of  the  people  were 
employed  in  making  manufactured  goods.  <;^But  there  was 
never  anything  like  this  in  France,  where  the  greater  part 
of  the  population  continued  to  be  engaged  in  agriculture, 
since  in  France  there  were  no  such  great  deposits  of  coal 
and  iron)  and  the  temperament  of  the  people  did  not  so 
readilytend  toward  large-scale  production  with  machines. 
Nevertheless,  by  the  middle  of  the  century  the  Industrial 
r^'  Revolution  had  done  its  work  and  brought  about  in  France 
the  problems  which  England  was  facing.  It  had  already 
spread  also  to  Belgium. 

More  slowly  it  moved  across  central  and  eastern  Europe. 
In  Austria  for  a  long  time  it  made  little  progress.  In  the 
German  lands  to  the  north  also  it  developed  somewhat 
later.  After  the  Congress  of  Vienna  the  Germanics  re- 
mained separated.  It  was  not  until  1834  that  they  went 
so  far  as  to  form  a  customs  union.  After  this  had  been 
achieved  the  old  barriers  obstructing  commerce  were  re- 
moved, and  wealth  and  manufacturing  increased.  After 
the  establishment  of  the  North  German  Confederation 
(1866),  and  especially  after  the  Franco-Prussian  War  and 
the  founding  of  the  Empire  (1871),  industrial  development 
went  forward  with  giant  strides^and  the  vast  alteration 
and  the  problems  which  had  revolutionized  Britain  half 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       119 


a  century  before  were  now  seen  in  Germany  also.  The 
Germans,  adopting  the  devices  which  others  had  invented 
to  do  new  work  or 'save  labor,  perfected  them  by  patient 
endeavor,  accomplished  with  them  new  results,  and  pres- 
ently worked  upon  large-scale  production  more  cheaply 
and  successfully  than  any  other  people  in  Europe. 

Spain  and  Italy,  lacking  coal  and  iron,  none  the  less 
developed  modern  industrialism  in  some  places  in  the 
later  years  of  the  century,)  and  about  Barcelona  and  Genoa 
and  Milan  appeared  the  great  factories,  the  slums,  and  the 
socialism,  long  before  seen  in  Birmingham  and  Paris.  In 
Switzerland  a  great  deal  of  manufacturing  continued  to 
be  done,  as  before,  in  houses  or  small  shops;  but  the  abun- 
dant power  of  numerous  swiftly  descending  streams  was 
also  employed  for  Industrial  development  in  place  of  coal, 
which  was  lacking.  Utilization  of  water  power  for  factory 
development  seemed  to  promise  greater  industrialism  in 
northern  Italy,  and  it  did  actually  make  possible  a  large 
amount  of  manufacturing  in  Norway  in  the  early  years  of 
the  twentieth  century.  To  the  Balkan  countries  except 
Rumania — a  very  striking  exception — backward,  and  but 
recently  escaped  from  the  debasing  tyranny  of  the  Turk, 
little  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  ever  came,  and  these 
people  remained  what  their  fathers  had  been  before  them, 
mountaineers  or  shepherds  or  farmers. 
^  In  Russia,  all  the  eastern  half  of  Europe,  the  Industrial 
Revolution  began  a  hundred  years  after  it  commenced  in 
Great  Britain.'  This  was  not  because  the  Russians  lacked 
the  materials  for  industrial  development,  since  they,  like 
the  Chinese,  had  abundance  of  coal  and  iron  and  they  had 
one  of  the  largest  supplies  of  petroleum  in  the  world. 
Their  backwardness  was  owing  to  comparatively  low  civi- 
lization, their  unwillingness  to  take  up  manufacturing, 
and  their  lack  of  aptitude  and  skill.  In  Russia  almost  all 
the  people,  generation  after  generation,  had  done  little 
more  than  carry  on  a  rude  agriculture;  few  of  them  had 


In  other 
lands 


The 

Industrial 
Revolution 
in  Russia 


120 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Imped> 
iments 


General 
results  in 
Europe 


/ 


Industry  and 
agriculture 
in  Great 
Britain 


any  education  or  any  industrial  training,  so  that  it  was  not 
easy  for  Russian  capitalists  to  find  skilled  and  industrious 
workmen,  and  what  they  could  produce  was  often  not  to 
be  made  so  cheaply  or  well  as  it  could  be  in  Great  Britain 
or  the  German  Empire.  They  were  also  immensely  ham- 
pered by  vast  distances  and  lack  of  railroads  and  good 
transportation.  Nevertheless,  in  the  latter  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  the  Industrial  Revolution  began  in 
Russia.  Factories  were  established  and  artisans  trained 
and  gathered  together,  mostly  in  the  western  parts  border- 
ing on  Germany  and  Austria-Hungary,  and  the  center  of 
Russian  industrial  life  was  in  what  had  been  the  old  King- 
dom of  Poland.  In  the  early  years  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury Petrograd,  Lodz,  and  Warsaw  had  their  tall  chimneys 
their  slums,  their  proletariat,  together  with  the  dark, 
strange  problems  which  the  Industrial  Revolution  had 
brought  to  western  Europe  long  before. 
'  Some  of  the  consequences  of  the  Industrial  Revolution 
in  Europe  were  temporary,  some  were  lasting.  Europe, 
and  especially  the  western  part,  obtained  still  greater  su- 
premacy and  wealth.  There  was  an  enormous  increase 
of  population  throughout  Europe  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tuiyj  Levasseur,  the  French  statistician,  reckoned  the 
numoer  of  inhabitants  in  1801  at  one  hundred  and  seventy- 
five  millions.  By  1900  the  population  was  about  four 
hundred  millions.  This  was  partly  due  to  the  increasing 
numbers  of  people  on  the  wide  Russian  plain;  but^in  some 
countries,  like  Great  Britain  and  the  German  Empire,  it 
was  principally  the  result  of  industrial  growthj^ 

In  1801  the  population  of  England  was  only  about  eight 
millions  five  hundred  thousand;  in  1901  it  was  more  than 
thirty -two  millions,  having  very  nearly  quadrupled.  Dur- 
ing that  period  agriculture  in  Britain  fell  back,  and  it  would 
have  been  impossible  to  feed  the  increasing  multitudes 
except  for  increasing  importations  of  food  bought  with  man- 
ufactured goods.     At  last  three  fourths  of  all  the  people 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       121 

were  occupied  in  industry  and  commerce.  Britain,  being 
first  in  the  field,  found  it  easy  enough  to  support  growing 
numbers  by  selling  manufactures  to  other  peoples  still 
mostly  engaged  in  agriculture,  and  she  had,  moreover,  an 
immense  colonial  empire,  in  many  parts  of  which  the  great- 
est opportunities  for  a  long  time  would  be  in  agriculture, 
in  grazing,  or  in  mining.  But  obviously,  in  course  of  time, 
each  country  would  desire  to  develop  its  own  manufactures, 
and  when  this  came  to  pass,  the  older  industrial  communi- 
ties would  no  longer  be  able  so  easily  to  get  their  own  living. 

Germany  afforded  some  evidence  of  this.  Her  popula-  in  the 
tion  also  greatly  increased  as  a  result  of  the  Industrial  German 
Revolution.  In  1837  the  population  of  the  lands  later  on  °^^^® 
contained  in  the  Empire  was  a  little  more  than  thirty-three 
millions;  by  1910  there  were  sixty-five  millions,  the  popula- 
tion having  almost  doubled.  Three  fifths  of  these  people 
were  now  engaged  in  manufactures  and  commerce ;  and  many 
of  them  got  their  living  by  making  goods  to  be  exchanged 
abroad  for  food.  But  the  Germans  had  no  great  colonial 
empire  to  buy  manufactured  articles  from  them,  and  were 
obliged  to  compete  in  a  field,  largely  taken  by  the  British 
before  them,  which  was  now  slowly  diminishing  as  other 
countries  established  their  own  industrial  systems.  In  the 
latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  Germany  could  well  Prospect 
support  her  population  by  expanding  manufactures  and  otihe 
selling  at  lower  cost;  but  many  of  her  people  believed  that 
later  on  this  could  not  be  done  unless  they  obtained  great 
colonial  dominions.  At  the  present  time  the  United 
States  has  become  industrially  self-sufficient,  and  other 
countries  are  on  the  way  to  achieving  such  state.  Japan 
aspires  to  become  the  workshop  of  the  Orient  until  such  time 
as  industrialism  develops  in  China.  Probably  countries 
like  Great  Britain  and  Germany  are  not  destined  to  con- 
tinue indefinitely  their  expansion  in  population  and  wealth, 
in  so  far  as  that  expansion  is  based  on  making  and  selling 
to  other  peoples  the  manufactured  goods  which  they  need. 


future 


m 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


r 


Great 

develop- 
ment of 
cities 


/^Shifting 
of  centers  of 
population 


/  There  was  a  change  from  rural  to  city  life  in  many  parts 
of  Europ^J  Down  to  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
there  was  no  large  community  in  Europe  in  which  the 
great  majority  of  the  people  did  not  make  their  living  by 
agriculture  and  live  in  villages  in  the  country.  Afterward, 
however,  in  those  countries  like  Great  Britain,  Belgium, 
and  the  German  Empire,  (^where  the  new  industrialism 
most  flourished,  in  course  of  time  most  of  the  people  were 
gathered  together  around  factories  in  cities  or  towns. 
So  most  of  these  people  were  cut  off  from  contact  with  the 
soil,  and  in  some  of  the  larger  places  almost  removed  from 
knowledge  and  acquaintance  with  the  country,  from  which 
their  forefathers  had  developed  character  and  derived 
their  principal  thoughts.  In  this  manner  arose  not  only  a 
new  set  of  problems,  but  also  a  different  character  and  a  new 
way  of  looking  at  things. 

Furthermore,  the  Industrial  Revolution  brought  about 
a  shifting  of  population,  with  alteration  in  the  relative 
importance  of  different  parts  of  the  same  country,  or  in- 
deed of  different  countries^  Down  to  the  middle  of  the 
eighteenth  century  the  rich  and  important  parts  of  Eng- 
land were  the  east  and  the  south,  containing  the  best  agri- 
cultural lands  and  the  principal  seaports.  After  1760  this 
was  gradually  changed  until  the  greater  part  of  the  people 
lived  about  the  new  industrial  centers  of  the  west  and  the 
north.  Scotland's  larger  prosperity  dates  from  the  latter 
part  of  the  eighteenth  century  when  industrial  life  devel- 
oped on  the  banks  of  the  Clyde.  In  the  early  Middle  Ages 
Flanders  and  the  western  Netherlands  contained  splendid 
cities  with  flourishing  small  manufactures,  but  after  the 
sixteenth  century,  those  parts  which  freed  themselves  from 
Spain  and  which  are  nowadays  known  as  Holland,  be- 
ginning a  great  commercial  development  became  far  richer 
and  more  powerful  than  the  parts  which  remained  under 
the  Spanish  rule,  known  as  the  Spanish  Netherlands,  and 
which  later  as  Belgium  were  made  subordinate  to  Holland. 


I 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       123 


But  with  the  industrial  development  which  followed  sep- 
aration from  Holland  in  1830,  Belgium,  with  her  coal  and 
iron  and  huge  factories  in  the  valley  of  the  Meuse,  went 
forward  in  wealth  and  population  faster  than  Holland. 
Until  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  France  con- 
tinued to  be  as  populous  as  Germany  and  stronger,  but 
after  that  time,  when  German  unity  was  accompanied  by 
mighty  industrial  growth,  Germany  went  forward  so  much 
more  rapidly  that  in  1914  she  had  half  again  as  much 
wealth  as  France  and  nearly  twice  the  population. 

Industrial  development  also  brought  great  changes  in 
military  strength.  As  the  Industrial  Revolution  pro- 
gressed, machines  and  tools  of  all  sorts  became  so  much 
more  complicated  and  powerful  that  a  great  change  took 
place  which  was  ill  understood  before  the  events  of  1914- 
15.  By  the  time  of  the  outbreak  of  the  Great  War,  the 
power  of  cannon  and  rapid-fite  guns  had  become  so  im- 
measurably great,  and  so  enormous  the  disparity  between 
men  supplied  with  modern  death-dealing  instruments  and 
the  very  bravest  not  so  equipped,  that  a  nation's  military 
strength  was  no  longer  in  any  direct  proportion  to  the  num- 
ber of  its  warriors,  but  to  the  size  of  its  armies  equipped 
with  modern  weapons  and  supplied  with  the  ammunition 
which  they  needed.  Therefore,  states  possessing  abun- 
dant iron  and  coal  with  developed  industrial  systems, 
numerous  factories  and  machines,  and  multitudes  of  skilful 
workmen  able  to  produce  vast  quantities  of  pig-iron  and 
steel  to  be  worked  up  into  mighty  weapons  of  precision  and 
other  implements  without  number,  were  the  only  powers 
that  could  fight  a  great  war  with  any  chance  of  ultimate  suc- 
cess. Russia — which  a  hundred  years  before  had  appeared 
a  colossus  and  still  had  by  far  the  greatest  number  of  fight- 
ing men  to  call  into  service,  but  which  had  as  yet  few  rail- 
roads and  factories  and  trained  industrial  workers — was 
found  to  possess  slight  military  power  compared  with 
Germany.     The  industrial  strength  of  Germany  was  then 


Industrial 
basis  of 
new  military 
strength 


Downfall  of 
Russia 


124 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


General 
changes 


New 

industrial 

organization 


The 

domestic 

system 


seen  to  be  the  basis  of  military  power  so  enormous  that 
at  first  she  easily  defeated  all  her  opponents.  The  war 
presently  became  fundamentally  a  great  duel  between 
Germany  and  England,  the  other  great  European  indus- 
trial nation;  and  was  finally  decided,  after  Russia  with  her 
millions  had  been  completely  crushed,  by  the  entrance  of 
the  United  States,  the  greatest  industrial  power  in  the 
world. 

(  The  problems,  the  ideas,  the  beliefs  which  arose  out  of 
the  Industrial  Revolution,  varied  in  different  places,  and, 
also,  in  some  parts  of  Europe  they  appeared  much  sooner 
than  in  others,  since,  generally  speaking,  the  Revolution 
reached  from  the  western  part  of  Europe  to  the  east  in 
about  a  hundred  years.  But  in  all  places  there  were  cer- 
tain conditions  of  primary  importance,  and  in  almost  all 
places  similar  results  followed  from  them. 

The  Industrial  Revolution  involved  a  fundamental 
change  in  manufacturing  methods,  in  living  conditions,  and 
in  relations  between  employer  and  employees.  Machines 
came  to  be  more  important  than  workmen.  Factories 
became  larger  and  larger.  Independent  workingmen  dis- 
appeared before  capitalist  employers,  small  capitalists 
before  large  ones;  and  in  the  end  industry  was  more 
and  more  organized  in  stupendous  corporations,  in'  which 
there  was  no  longer  any  personal  relation  between  em- 
ployer and  employees,  and  often  no  understanding  between 
them. 

^  Under  the  old  system  of  industry  manufacturing  was 
carried  on  mostly  in  houses  of  the  workmen  themselves. 
There  the  man  of  the  house  made  his  shoes,  wove  his  cloth, 
or  worked  with  his  leather  or  iron,  assisted  by  wife  and 
children,  or,  where  the  guild  system  still  survived,  the  mas- 
ter worked  in  the  midst  of  apprentices  who  were  learning 
their  trades.  Most  of  the  work  they  did  with  their  hands, 
or  with  small  and  simple  machines.  Personal,  intimate 
relations  existed  between  all  these  workers.     The  father 


INDUSTRIAL  RjEVOJLUTION       125 


might  be  a  little  of  a  tyrant;  a  bad  master  might  abuse  or 
overwork  his  apprentices;  but  an  honest  and  kindly  man 
watched  out  for  the  welfare  of  those  around  him,  and  was 
able  to  do  it  because  he  lived  with  them  and  knew  of  the 
thuigs  which  concerned  them.  During  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries  this  system  was  being  partly 
superseded  by  small  factories  and  capitalism.  None  the 
less  most  of  the  manufacturing  continued  to  be  done  as 
before  by  the  domestic  system,  in  the  houses  of  the 
workers,  and  many  of  them  worked  for  themselves. 

At  first  the  new  inventions  made  no  great  change.  Not 
every  successful  workman  could  afford  to  buy  Har- 
greaves's  spinning-jenny,  yet  this  machine  was  not  very 
cumbersome  or  costly.  But  the  heavy-power  spinning 
machines  of  Arkwright  could  be  got  only  by  the  few  who 
had  considerable  capital  to  buy  them  and  put  up  buildings 
in  which  to  instal  them.  And  when  presently  power- 
looms  and  spinning  appliances  were  run  by  steam  engines, 
then  only  capitalists  could  buy  them. 

This  involved  hardship  in  the  time  of  adjustment,  and 
entire  change  in  the  way  manufacturing  was  done.  In  all 
countries  where  the  large  machines  were  brought  into 
use  most  of  the  domestic  industry  was  slowly  crushed  out. 
For  a  while  the  workers  would  strive  desperately  to  com- 
pete, working  longer  hours  and  selling  their  products  more 
cheaply  than  before;  but  almost  always  in  the  end  they 
failed  completely.  Hence  the  old  system  passed  away. 
Most  of  the  workers  drifted  to  the  towns  where  the  fac- 
tories were  rising.  Some  could  find  no  place  in  the  new 
system;  and  it  seemed  to  them  very  wrong  that  through 
no  fault  of  theirs  they  could  no  longer  make  a  living,  be- 
cause machines  took  away  all  their  chance.  Sometimes 
they  resisted  desperately,  and  mobs  of  weavers  smashed 
the  new  looms  or  tried  to  prevent  other  workers  from 
using  them.  When  the  law  was  invoked  all  this  came  to 
an  end,  and,  more  and  more,  men  and  women  who  had 


Changed  by 
the  large 
machines 


The  old 
system 
passes 


126 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Factory 
towns 


Working 
conditions 


I  /a 


Laissez- 
faire 
marks  the 
Industrial 
Revolution 


worked  in  their  cottages  with  wheels  and  hand-looms  gave 
up  their  efforts  and  asked  for  factory  employment. 

In  Britain  in  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 
and  in  the  German  Empire  in  the  latter  part,  it  was  less 
easy  to  make  a  living  in  agriculture,  because  grain  and 
meat  could  be  produced  so  much  more  cheaply  on  a  large 
scale  in  Argentina,  Australia,  and  the  United  States. 
German  agriculture  after  1879  always  held  its  own  because 
it  was  protected,  but  in  Britain  after  the  repeal  of  the  Corn 
Laws  in  1846,  when  such  protection  was  abandoned,  Brit- 
ish agriculture  declined,  and  people  were  not  only  at- 
tracted to  the  factories  but  to  a  considerable  extent  almost 
driven  away  from  the  farms.  Long  before  this  there  had 
been  a  steady  drift  of  workers  to  industrial  towns,  where 
they  were  crowded  and  huddled  together  in  the  miserable 
tenements  of  squalid  parts  newly  built.  There  was 
wretched  overcrowding,  with  much  dirt  and  unhappiness 
and  disease.  Many  people  now  spent  their  lives  working 
in  factories,  living  in  narrow  streets,  blackened  and  soiled 
with  smoke  from  the  chimneys,  after  a  while  so  far  away 
from  the  country  that  many  lost  all  love  for  nature. 

Formerly,  life  had  often  been  hard  enough,  and  living 
very  meager,  but  many  of  the  workers  had  been  their  own 
masters.  Now  they  worked  very  largely  at  the  mercy  of 
employers  who  owned  the  indispensable  machines,  and 
whose  principal  consideration  was  usually  the  getting  of 
wealth,  not  the  employees'  welfare.  Generally  there  were 
more  laborers  seeking  work  than  were  needed,  so  that  the 
employer  had  great,  even  cruel  advantage. 
{  In  all  places  the  beginning  of  Industrial  Revolution 
brought  as  much  misery  as  benefit  to  the  workers.  This 
resulted  very  largely  because  certain  principles  and  ideas 
were  applied  to  conditions  for  which  they  were  not 
adapted.  The  Industrial  Revolution  resulted  not  merely 
from  great  mechanical  inventions,  from  power-looms,  en- 
gines, and  steamboats,  but  also  because  of  the  rise  of  the 


I 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       127 


doctrine  of  laissez-faire  and  the  abandoning  of  previous 
restrictions  by  which  industry  had  been  regulated  and 
employers  and  employees  protected. )  Formerly  in  England 
and  in  Continental  states  there  had  been  elaborate  regula- 
tions, which,  notwithstanding  that  they  were  made  by  the 
upper  classes,  yet  gave  some  protection  to  the  workers. 
But  in  course  of  time,  as  the  older  system  decayed,  those 
who  favored  new  methods  believed  that  these  regulations 
interfered  with  industry  more  than  they  helped  it;  and 

Cduring  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  whole 
tendency  had  been  to  remove  restrictions  and  let  things 
take  their  own  course.  Hence  arose  the  doctrine  of 
laissez-faire,  taught  by  Turgot  and  other  French  writers 
and  brought  by  Adam  Smith  into  England.  At  this  time 
also  Rousseau  and  his  contemporaries  were  teaching  that 
men  had  natural  rights  which  had  been  obstructed  or  taken 
away  by  interference  of  the  government  above  them. 
This  doctrine  developed  in  one  direction  toward  equality, 
democracy,  and  self-government;  in  another  direction  it 
led  to  the  belief  that  men  should  have  freedom  of  contract, 
freedom  to  work  in  such  conditions  as  they  chose,  or  liberty 
to  manage  their  business  without  governmental  regulation. 
Experience  was  to  show  that  the  freedom  of  laissez-faire 
would  give  more  power  to  the  strong  and  put  the  mass  of 
the  laborers  in  more  lowly  and  hopeless  subjection.  J 

/"  One  effect  of  the  Revolution  was  to  establish  a  new  upper 
class.  "Aristocracy  always  exists,"  said  Napoleon  on  one 
occasion.  ■  "Destroy  it  in  the  nobility,  it  removes  itself 
immediately  to  the  rich  and  powerful  houses  of  the  middle 
class.  Destroy  it  in  these,  it  survives  and  takes  refuge  with 
the  leaders  of  the  workshops  and  people."  Napoleon 
could  little  understand  the  forces  of  democracy  then  rising, 
and  he  could  not  foresee  that  perhaps  the  greatest  move- 
ment of  the  next  hundred  years  would  be  the  attempt  really 
to  improve  the  condition  of  the  masses  by  giving  them 
control  of  their  governments  and  bettering  their  economic 


Regulation 
abandoned 


The  new 
upper  class 


128 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Power  of  the 

capitalist 

owners 


Wages 


/^Depression 
of  the  mass 
of  the 
workers    , 


position.  Neither  he  nor  his  contemporaries  could  know, 
perhaps,  that  the  Industrial  Revolution  then  progressing 
in  England  would  be  the  most  powerful  factor  in  bringing 
this  change.  But  contemporaries  must  have  seen  then 
that  one  of  its  first  great  effects  was  to  make  a  powerful 
new  upper  class. 

/"  Owners  and  managers  were  an  upper  industrial  class, 
since  only  the  rich  and  successful  could  buy  the  machines 
and  develop  the  great  new  industrial  arrangements..  In 
medieval  times  the  barons  and  lords  of  the  manor  had  held 
much  power  over  the  villeins  who  worked  their  estates; 
scarcely  less  great  was  the  power  now  of  manufacturers 
over  their  employees.  There  was  frequently  a  surplus  of 
labor;  so  they  could  get  as  many  workmen  as  they  wanted, 
decide  which  ones  to  employ,  and  dictate  to  them  the 
terms  and  the  wages.  The  government  ceased  interven- 
ing to  protect  the  workers,  and  it  was  moreover  controlled 
by  the  upper  classes  who  considered  their  own  interests 
first.  The  belief  was  held  that  poverty  and  suffering  re- 
sulted from  operation  of  natural  laws,  which  kindness 
could  never  remove,  and  that  best  results  were  always 
obtained  by  each  man  seeking  his  own  selfish  interest. 
It  was  often  said  then,  as  later,  that  larger  wages  would 
only  result  in  larger  numbers  of  children,  after  which  the 
families  would  be  no  better  off  than  before.  So,  the  pre- 
dominating doctrine  in  England  was  that  capitalists  should 
make  as  great  profits  and  take  from  the  workers  as  much 
labor  as  possible,  and  pay  as  low  wages  as  they  could. 
/  And  this  was  done'in  Britain,  and  at  other  times  in  almost 
all  places  where  industrialism  was  being  established. 
Great  prosperity  came  to  some,  and  the  nation  seemed 
rapidly  growing  rich,  but  actually  there  were  horrible 
results.  Workers  with  their  families  crowded  into  the 
factory  towns  because  they  could  no  longer  make  a  living 
in  their  cottages  or  out  in  the  country.  The  throngs  of 
laborers  bid  against  each  other  for  work,  and  wages  were 


i^imk     .'? 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       129 


easily  driven  down.  Often  the  man  alone  could  not  sup- 
port his  family.  This  had  frequently  been  so  under  the 
older  system,  for  in  the  home  industries  often  the  man  was 
helped  by  his  wife  and  his  children.  Now  they  also  must 
go  to  the  mills  and  get  scanty  wages.  This  depressed 
men's  wages  still  more,  for  frequently  capitalists  found 
that  their  machines  could  be  run  just  as  well  by  the  cheap 
labor  of  women  and  children.  Not  all  of  the  picture 
should  be  dark;  but  in  the  mill  towns  of  Britain  there  were 
presently  many  idle  men  and  many  more  who  got  insuffi- 
cient wages.  There  were  also  women  working  long,  hard 
hours,  and  so  weakening  themselves  that  often  their  babies 
died  soon  after  birth,  or  lived  to  grow  up  weak  and  sickly. 
There  were  also  in  the  factories  many  small  children,  who 
should  have  been  at  play  or  in  school,  but  who  at  the  worst 
should  never  been  have  made  to  toil  the  long  hours  of 
drudgery  given  them.  In  England  there  had  been  for 
generations  a  sturdy  agricultural  population  which  sup- 
plied the  fighting  men  who  won  England's  wars;  now  a 
considerable  part  of  the  population  degenerated,  and 
the  factory  towns  contained  many  poor,  ill-nourished, 
over-worked  men,  women,  and  children,  pale  and  weak 
and  disheartened. 

^  It  was  scarcely  realized  at  first  how  much  power  the 
concentration  of  wealth  was  giving  to  the  industrial  mag- 
nates who  possessed  it,  and  how  helpless  the  individual 
worker  was  before  them.  It  is  clear  enough  now  that 
whereas  in  the  Middle  Ages  aristocrats  or  the  strong  and 
able  men  either  went  into  the  Church  and  rose  to  be 
powerful  ecclesiastics,  or  got  to  be  captains  in  the  wars  or 
noblemen  with  castles,  men-at-arms,  and  manorial  rights 
over  their  fellows,  now  the  able  or  the  privileged  went 
into  industry  and  commerce  and  won  for  themselves  power 
and  position  with  their  gold  or  with  their  machines.  Only 
by  uniting  could  the  workers  hope  to  oppose  them  success- 
fully.    Long  before  the  Industrial  Revolution  English 


Degenera- 
tion 


Combina- 
tions of 
workmen 
forbidden 


130 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Conditions 
worse,  not 
better 


r  Ameliora- 
tion 


The  state 
intervenes 


workingmen  had  attempted  to  form  combinations,  but 
these  eJ0Forts  were  frustrated  and  forbidden  by  laws,  and  at 
the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  it  was  a  well- 
recognized  principle  that  unions  of  workmen  were  harmful 
to  industry  and  also  dangerous  to  the  state. 

The  result  was  that  for  a  great  number  of  people  condi- 
tions became  worse  and  not  better,  SpJendid  new  ideas 
about  equality  had  come  into  vogue,  and  there  had 
even  been  some  attempts  to  let  men  govern  themselves; 
but  the  mass  of  the  people  found  that  they  could 
not  get  their  living  any  easier  than  before  and  some 
found  it  harder  than  ever.  The  French  Revolution  had 
affected  civil  and  legal  affairs,  rather  than  economic,  and 
moreover  new  economic  conditions  were  now  being  cre- 
ated by  the  Industrial  Revolution  which  only  new  reforms 
could  amend. 

There  was  no  simple  remedy.  In  some  respects  a  new 
world  was  being  made,  and  for  a  long  time  the  utmost  to 
be  accomplished  would  be  the  gradual  bringing  about  of 
new  and  better  conditions  as  the  result  of  long  work  and 
patient  endeavor.     After  a  while  some  things  were  done. 

/  In  England,  where  the  Revolution  first  went  far,  the  doc- 
trine of  laissez-faire  was  presently  abandoned.  In  course 
of  time  people,  becoming  more  enlightened  and  humane, 
could  not  believe  that " enlightened  self-interest"  did  bring 
the  best  results.  (  The  government  began  to  intervene 
and  pass  laws  limiting  the  hours  of  labor  for  women 
and  children,  specifying  the  age  under  which  children 
might  not  be  employed,  and  presently  allowing  working- 
men  to  combine  in  unions  for  their  advantage  and  protec- 
tion. Progress  was  slow,  for  legislators  hesitated  to 
curtail  the  rights  of  individuals  or  let  the  state  intervene  in 
industrial  affairs,  so  that  often  the  early  laws  did  little  to 
regulate  conditions  and  brought  small  relief.  Moreover 
restrictions  were  generally  evaded  at  first  and  ill-enforced. 

(  But  in  course  of  time  the  protection  given  workers  by  the 


■.^t^' 


I 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION        131 


government  was  greater,  and  much  good  followed.  Mean- 
while combinations  of  workingmen,  which  had  been 
specifically  forbidden  in  1799  and  1800  but  legalized  in 
1824  and  1825,  slowly  went  forward.  They  were  very 
weak  at  first  and  usually  lost  their  contests  with  em- 
ployers. It  could  scarcely  be  foreseen  then  that  less 
than  a  hundred  years  later  labor  unions  would  have  got  so 
much  power  as  to  be  threatening  governments  and  in 
some  places  making  their  members  a  specially  favored 
industrial  class.  For  the  present,  however,  the  condition 
of  the  industrial  workers,  or  the  proletariat,  as  they  were 
getting  to  be  called,  was  generally  low,  and  improving  so 
slowly  that  impatient  or  radical  thinkers  believed  the  whole 
existing  system  to  be  wrong,  and  that  new  conditions 
demanded  a  new  and  different  system.  This  led  to  the  rise 
of  new  doctrines,  some  of  which  were  among  the  most  im- 
portant contributions  of  the  nineteenth  century,  especially 
socialism,  which,  as  Toynbee  said,  was  one  of  the  para- 
mount results  of  the  Industrial  Revolution.) 
c  A  long  time  before  there  were  people  who  believed  the 
economic  system  of  their  times  to  be  wrong,  that  some 
had  too  much  and  most  had  too  little;  but  generally  their 
teachings  made  little  headway,  for  the  old  system  was  based 
upon  control  of  government  and  property  by  a  small  upper 
class,  and  generally  the  Church,  the  most  powerful  factor 
in  European  civilization,  gave  to  this  system  its  sanction^ 
In  1360  John  Ball  and  others  preached  to  English  villeins 
that  in  the  beginning  men  were  equal,  and  that  serfdom 
ought  to  be  abolished.  During  the  Puritan  Revolution  in 
England,  in  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century,  certain 
Levelers  arose  to  preach  that  men  should  have  equal  posi- 
tion. During  the  French  Revolution  radical  leaders 
sought  social  and  economic  equality  after  civil  and  politi- 
cal inequalities  had  been  abolished.  In  1794  Babeuf  de- 
clared that  without  economic  opportunity  there  could  be 
little  social  or  political  equality^  and  that  still  the  few  were 


Working- 
men 
combine 


Social 

radicals 

before 

socialism 

began 


In  the 

French 

Revolution 


Babeuf 


132 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Robert 
Owen — 

sharing  of 
profits 


Communism 
or  socialism 


lording  it  over  the  many.  Reformers  then  had  to  do  with 
agricultural  France,  and  the  sale  on  easy  terms  to  the 
peasants  of  the  lands  of  the  nobles  and  the  Church  presently 
brought  better  chance  than  the  mass  of  the  people  of  any 
nation  ever  had  had.  But  now  the  Industrial  Revolution 
was  creating  a  new  proletariat,  for  whom  other  measures 
were  needed. 

{^'  Early  in  the  nineteenth  century  Robert  Owen,  a  Scotch- 
man, instituted  at  New  Lanark  a  model  factory  com- 
munity, where  the  workers  shared  in  the  profits  of  their 
labor.  He  believed  that  it  would  be  possible  for  industrial 
and  agricultural  life  so  to  be  arranged  everywhere.  Under 
his  enthusiastic  and  able  leadership  the  enterprise  at  New 
Lanark  was  very  successful;  but  attempts  to  set  up  similar 
communities  elsewhere  usually  failed.  Generally  it  was 
found  that  a  man  with  the  enterprise  and  skill  necessary 
to  make  such  a  scheme  succeed  would  only  work  for  him- 
self, and  also  that  the  workers,  while  greatly  pleased  to 
have  part  of  the  profits,  were  unwilling  or  unable  to  share 
in  the  losses  if  the  enterprise  was  not  successful.  Never- 
theless, in  course  of  time,  cooperative  stores  and  enter- 
prises were  established  successfully  not  only  in  Great 
Britain  but  in  many  other  countries,  though  their  working 
has  not  yet  had  fundamental  effect  upon  the  condition  of 
many  of  the  workers. 

Owen's  idea,  that  profits  should  be  shared  by  those  who 
worked  together  to  produce  them,  was  easily  developed 
into  the  idea  that  there  should  be  no  profits,  but  that  in- 
dustry should  be  regulated  by  people  working  together  for 
their  common  advantage*  Communism  had  been  taught 
by  some  of  the  old  religious  societies,  and  in  the  Middle 
Ages  the  houses  of  the  friars  had  been  established  upon  this 
plan.  Some  people  now  taught  that  laborers  should  work 
as  comrades  together,  for  their  common  advantage.  In 
1835  a  disciple  of  Robert  Owen  used  the  word  "socialist" 
(socius,  comrade  or  ally). 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       133 


Meanwhile  the  Industrial  Revolution  was  developing 
in  France;  factories,  slums,  and  proletariat  were  attracting 
more  and  more  attention,  and  great-hearted  men  arose  to 
advocate  the  workingman's  cause.  Saint  Simon,  the  foun- 
der of  French  socialism,  proposed  that  all  property  should 
be  owned  by  the  state  and  that  industry  should  be  regulated 
by  men  of  science.  Nothing  came  of  this,  nor  of  the  pro- 
posals of  Fourier,  who  wished  to  see  the  establishment  of 
industrial  communities  in  which  profits  should  be  divided 
between  labor,  capital,  and  talent.  Somewhat  later  ap- 
peared Louis  Blanc,  who  condemned  industrial  competi- 
tion, and  taught  that  the  state  should  institute  "social" 
workshops,  in  which  the  workingmen  would  choose  their 
managers  and  divide  the  gains.  His  plan  for  national 
workshops  was  soon  espoused  by  many  workingmen  in 
Paris.  In  the  Revolution  of  1848  a  provisional  govern- 
ment was  established  in  which  Blanc  and  other  leaders  of 
the  socialists  were  represented.  National  workshops  were 
established  but  soon  abolished.  Then  the  socialists  and 
workmen  rose  in  revolt,  but  after  three  days  of  fighting  in 
the  streets  they  were  mercilessly  crushed,  and  the  ex- 
periment came  to  an  end. 

Nevertheless,  the  idea  persisted  that  enterprises  sh^jild 
be  owned  by  the  state  and  managed  for  the  workers  within 
them.     In  the  following  decades  many  of  the  great  public 
utilities  were  bought  by  the  governments  of  European    • 
countries,   and  public  ownership  was  widely  extended^y 
In   France,  in   Prussia,  in   Italy,  in  England,  railways, 
tramways,  telephones,  telegraphs,  were  bought  by  the 
central    government    or    by    the    governments    of    th^)^ 
cities;  but  the  benefits   of  this  public   ownership   were  \ 
for  all  the  people  and  not  merely  for  the  particular  em- 
ployees in  question.     After  1914  especially,  the  doctrine 
was  spread  about  that  capitalists  must  disappear,  that 
industries,  like   transportation  and  the  mining  of  coal, 
must  be  purchased  by  the  state,  and  then  operated  and 


Beginning 
of  socialism 
in  France 


Public 
ownership 
and  nation- 
alization 


134  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

managed  by  their  workers  who  would  share  such  profits 
as  arose. 

/'  In  after  days  the  rise  of  socialism  was  remembered  es- 
pecially in  connection  with  the  work  of  Karl  Marx  (1818- 
1883).  Of  Jewish  descent,  and  of  a  middle-class  family  in 
Rhenish  Prussia,  Marx  was  at  first  a  bourgeois  liberal,  but 
after  a  while,  through  study  of  the  teachings  of  Owen  and 
through  acquaintance  with  Blanc  in  Paris,  he  became  a 
socialist  and  an  advocate  of  the  workingmen's  cause.  In 
1848  he  and  his  colleague,  Friedrich  Engels,  published  the 
Communist  Manifesto,  a  small  pamphlet  containing  in  brief 
form  the  socialist  doctrines.  "  Let  the  ruling  classes  trem- 
ble," they  said.  "Workmen  of  all  lands,  unite."  Forced 
to  leave  the  Continent  soon  after,  he  took  refuge  in  Eng- 
land, where  he  lived  until  his  death.  During  these  years, 
in  the  midst  of  poverty,  discouragement,  and  meager 
living,  writing  in  his  rooms  often  among  his  tumbling  and 
shouting  small  children,  he  prepared  his  books,  especially 
his  great  study  of  political  economy.  Das  Kapitaly  which, 
like  Darwin's  Origin  of  the  Species,  was  destined  to  be  one 
of  the  most  important,  and  least  read,  books  of  the  nine- 
teenth century. 

^According  to  Marx  there  had  always  been  a  few  at  the 
top  ruling  and  exploiting  the  many  at  the  bottom.  In 
ancient  times  the  contest  was  between  masters  and  slaves; 
slavery  had  gradually  disappeared,  but  then  society  was 
divided  into  lords  above  and  the  serfs  beneath  them;  grad- 
ually serfdom  had  disappeared  in  most  places,  as  nobles 
and  lords  lost  their  power,  but  the  age-long  struggle  was 
still  being  fought,  now  between  capitalists  and  the  indus- 
trial workers.  In  the  end  the  bourgeoisie,  the  workingmen's 
enemy  and  master,  would  be  overthrown  completely. 
Now  the  workers  toiled  for  their  masters  in  factories  and 
were  huddled  together  in  tenements  and  slums,  but  their 
number  was  great  and,  if  they  could  unite  with  the  workers 
in  the  country,  they  might  some  day  get  the  government 


0 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       135 


within  their  control.  Capital  and  wealth  were  held  by  a 
few;  they  were  destined  to  be  concentrated  in  still  fewer 
hands;  then  finally,  when  the  people  got  control,  all  would 
be  taken  over  by  the  state  for  the  people.  Marx  declared 
that  middle-class  capitalists  largely  owned  as  private  prop- 
erty the  wealth  which  had  been  created  by  the  workers, 
and  that  with  the  destruction  of  the  bourgeoisie,  this  should 
be  brought  to  an  end  and  capital  be  the  common  property 
of  the  people.  He  urged  that  all  should  be  made  to  labor, 
that  inheritance  and  rent  be  abolished,  that  all  means  of 
transportation  should  be  owned  by  the  state,  and  that 
industrial  and  agricultural  work  should  be  directed  and 
controlled  by  the  government.  "The  proletarians,"  said 
the  Manifesto,  "have  nothing  to  lose  but  their  chains. 
They  have  a  world  to  win.") 

^^^ocialism,  or  communism,  as  he  called  it  at  first,  re- 
ceived vast  impetus  and  new  meaning  from  his  teachings/ 
Das  Kapital  never  directly  influenced  many,  but  the  teach- 
ings of  the  master  were  reduced  to  simple  form,  popular- 
ized and  spread  broadcast,  as  new  teachings  and  great 
doctrines  usually  are,  by  numerous  disciples  who  told  and 
retold  them,  until  presently  they  became  one  of  the  great 
factors  in  the  intellectual  and  economic  life  of  the  world; 
and  after  some  time  had  gone  by  it  was  seen  that  the 
teachings  of  Marx,  like  the  exhortations  of  Luther  and  the 
theories  of  Rousseau,  and  like  the  doctrine  of  evolution 
taught  by  Darwin,  had  profoundly  affected  the  i^inds  of 
great  numbers  of  men. 

^  "In  1862  he  took  the  lead  in  founding  the  International 
Working  Men's  Association,  often  known  as  the  Inter- 
nationale, which  brought  together  in  one  organization  of 
comrades  the  socialist  organizations  of  different  countries. 
This  soon  broke  down,  though  international  meetings  came 
together  from  time  to  time  later  on.  National  feelings 
silently  but  constantly  grew  stronger,  and  it  was  impossible 
to  hold  together  the  workingmen  of  all  countries  in  one 


Effect  of  the 
teachings 
of  Marx 


Further 
progress 


136 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


international  organization.  In  1914,  at  the  outbreak  of 
the  Great  War,  German  and  Austrian  socialists,  then  the 
socialists  of  France  and  Great  Britain,  were  swept  onward 
by  national  and  patriotic  feelings  to  give  their  governments 
very  full  support;  so  that  again  the  Internationale,  which 
had  preached  the  brotherhood  of  the  workmen  of  all 
nations,  was  fatally  shattered.  In  1871  socialism  received 
a  setback  in  the  overthrow  of  the  Commune  of  Paris,  which 
Marx  had  hoped  would  succeed.  Moreover,  the  social- 
ists, in  the  presence  of  their  own  vast  doctrines,  began  to 
split  up  into  different  creeds,  so  that  by  the  end  of  the 
nineteenth  century  it  was  often  difficult  to  tell  what  social- 
ism meant.  None  the  less,  in  the  meantime  it  had  con- 
tinued to  gain  strength  in  England  and  Germany  and 
France;  it  entered  Russia  and  the  United  States;  and  after 
a  while  was  felt  in  almost  every  country  in  the  world. 

In  Germany  socialism  was  carried  forward  under  the 
inspiring  leadership  of  Ferdinand  Lasalle,  disciple  of  Marx. 
In  1869  the  Social  Democratic  Party  was  founded  by  Wil- 
helm  Liebknecht  and  August  BebeL  Socialists  were  re- 
garded with  suspicion  and  dislike  by  the  government  of 
the  new  German  Empire,  stem  laws  were  passed  against 
them,  and  presently  some  of  the  things  they  demanded 
were  done  by  the  state  itself;  nevertheless  their  organiza- 
tion grew  rapidly  until  at  last  it  had  the  largest  following 
of  any  party  in  the  country;  though  it  got  its  support  from 
many  who  were  not  strictly  socialists  but  merely  liberals 
and  progressives.  In  Austria-Hungary  also  socialism 
made  some  progress;  but  not  till  the  beginning  of  the 
twentieth  century  did  a  socialist  political  party  attain  any 
importance  there.  This  was  partly  because  the  country 
was  backward,  and  partly  because  in  no  other  great  state 
was  the  population  less  homogeneous  and  more  divided  by 
race  and  religion. 

In  France  also  socialism  went  rapidly  forward,  though 
with  violent  upheavals,  which  were  followed  by  such  re- 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       137 


action  and  repression  that  development  was  retarded 
for  a  while.  The  socialist  rising  in  Paris  in  1848  was 
crushed  after  terrible  fighting.  The  capture  of  Paris  by 
the  Germans  in  1871  was  almost  immediately  followed  by 
the  establishment  there  by  socialists,  anarchists,  and  radi- 
cals of  a  commune,  which,  had  it  been  maintained,  might 
have  been  a  socialist  community  only  loosely  connected 
with  the  rest  of  France.  But  the  conservative  people  and 
the  peasants  overthrew  it.  There  was  much  destruction 
of  property  and  life,  followed  by  great  and  merciless  ven- 
geance. For  the  time  the  socialists  and  anarchists  were 
completely  crushed,  and  radical  doctrines  were  entirely 
discredited  with  most  of  the  people  of  the  country.  But 
gradually  socialism  gained  strength  again.  For  some  time 
French  socialists  were  divided  into  parties,  especially  under 
Jules  Guesde,  a  follower  of  Marx,  and  Jean  Jaures,  the 
greatest  and  most  accomplished  orator  of  his  age,  who 
advocated  gradually  socializing  the  means  of  production. 
In  1904  the  different  factions  were  united,  and  ten  years 
later  the  Socialist  Party  received  1,500,000  votes  in  France. 
In  Italy  and  in  Spain  also  socialist  doctrines  made  consid- 
erable progress. 

In  Great  Britain  socialism  advanced  more  slowly  than 
in  Germany  or  France.  This  was  due  very  largely  to  the 
temperament  of  the  British  people,  long  accustomed  to 
slow  change  and  improvement,  and  always  distrustful  of 
the  usefulness  of  theories  and  general  ideas.  In  1880 
William  Morris,  the  poet,  and  other  followers  of  the  teach- 
ings of  Marx,  organized  the  Social  Democratic  Federation. 
Three  years  later  the  Fabian  Society  was  founded  by  a 
group  of  intellectual  leaders,  including  the  Anglo-Irish 
dramatist,  G.  B.  Shaw.  They  proposed  to  follow  the 
"Fabian"  policy  of  gradually  getting  political  parties  to 
accept  and  carry  through  social  reforms.  Presently  social- 
ism began  to  affect  the  labor  organizations,  and  in  1893  a 
trade  union  leader  organized  the  Independent  Labor  Party, 


Progress 
after  1871 


In  Great 
Britain 


The  Fabian 
Society 


138 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


whose  members  hoped  that  socialism  might  ultimately  be 
brought  to  prevail. 

In  Russia  industrialism  made  only  a  small  part  of  the 
life  of  a  nation  whose  people  were  mostly  agricultural 
workers.  Nevertheless,  it  was  in  Russia  that  the  most 
thorough-going  experiment  in  socialism  was  tried.  During 
the  misery  and  confusion  which  overwhelmed  that  country 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  Great  War,  the  old  system  com- 
pletely collapsed.  In  1918,  after  a  revolution  had  over- 
thrown the  government,  certain  socialists  forming  a  group 
called  the  Bolsheviki,  seized  power  and  maintained  them- 
selves, while  they  decreed  some  of  the  sweeping  changes 
which  Marx  had  long  before  hoped  would  come  to 
pass.  Private  property  and  inheritance  were  abol- 
ished; land,  capital,  transportation  were  nationalized; 
and  it  was  decreed  that  all  people  should  work.  By 
this  time  all  over  the  world  radical  leaders  were  proclaim- 
ing that  socialism  was  the  hope  of  the  future,  and  des- 
tined shortly  to  overthrow  what  they  called  the  out-worn 
systems. 

No  teachings  in  the  nineteenth  century  aroused  stronger 
opposition  and  greater  dread  than  the  socialist  doctrines. 
They  were  boldly  aimed  at  existing  political  and  social 
organization,  so  that  governments,  churches,  and  the  great 
body  of  conservative  and  propertied  people  everywhere 
were  almost  always  hostile  and  suspicious,  in  so  far  as  they 
knew  anything  about  them.  Twice  did  the  French  gov- 
ernment suppress  French  socialists  by  force;  and  under 
Bismarck's  leadership  the  government  of  the  German  Em- 
pire passed  drastic  laws  against  them.  In  the  latter  part 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  however,  socialists  became  more 
moderate  and  also  began  to  exert  wider  influence.  Ac- 
cordingly, governments  themselves  undertook  to  carry  out 
some  of  the  socialist  ideas.  This  state  socialism  was  begun 
by  Bismarck  in  Germany  in  the  years  1883-9.  Thence  it 
spread  into  France;  and  largely  as  a  result  of  the  influence 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       139 


of  the  Fabian  Society  was  undertaken  by  the  Liberal 
Party  in  the  United  Kingdom. 

More  determined  was  the  opposition  of  the  churches. 
In  England,  in  France,  in  Germany,  and  elsewhere,  it  is 
true.  Christian  Socialists,  like  Charles  Kingsley  and  the 
Abbe  Lamennais,  had  striven  to  amend  the  condition  of  the 
poorer  classes  through  legislation  by  the  state,  but  they 
were  usually  altogether  opposed  to  the  ideas  of  Marx;  and 
most  churchmen  were  against  all  socialist  teachings. 
Greatest  of  all  was  the  opposition  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church.  Its  authorities  condemned  the  new  teachings 
completely.  In  1864  Pope  Pius  IX  denounced  socialism 
and  communism  in  the  Syllabus  of  Errors,  and  in  1891 
Pope  Leo  XIII  in  his  encyclical  Rerum  Novarum  declared 
that  socialist  teachings  violated  the  natural  right  of  prop- 
erty, though  he  deplored  the  greed  of  employers  and  urged 
that  the  condition  of  workers  be  improved.  On  no  occa- 
sion was  this  hostility  abated.  "The  last  great  fight," 
said  a  socialist  leader,  "will  be  between  the  Blacks  and  the 
Reds;"  meaning  the  Catholic  Church,  with  its  black-robed 
priests,  and  the  socialists  who  had  taken  for  their  standard 
the  red  flag.  Socialists  refused  to  follow  the  dictates  of 
the  Church;  while  conservative  people  looked  on  the 
churches  as  a  bulwark  against  radical  teachings. 

Extremer  social  doctrines  had  long  been  preached. 
About  the  time  when  Marx  began  doing  his  work  a  French- 
man, Proudhon,  revived  and  extended  the  teachings  of 
predecessors  in  France,  that  government  interfered  with 
the  liberties  and  thwarted  the  happiness  of  most  of  the 
people,  and  he  declared  that  the  best  condition  would  be 
one  of  absence  of  government,  anarchy  ('avapx^a),  free- 
dom from  interference  by  the  state.  He  also  said  that 
property  was  got  by  plundering  the  mass  of  the  people. 
His  most  famous  work,  Qu'est-ce  que  la  Propriete?  (What  is 
Property.?),  published  in  1840,  declared  that  property  was 
theft.     Proudhon  was  a  theorist,  kindly  and  humane;  but 


Hostility 
of  the 
chiirches 


Anarchism 


140 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Anarchism 
opposed  by 
socialists 


Syndicalism 


his  doctrines  were  taken  up  by  bolder  and  more  violent 
persons,  who  undertook  to  accomplish  great  reforms  by 
getting  rid  of  existing  governments,  and  who  strove  to 
destroy  governments  by  murdering  their  principal  oflScials. 
Under  Bakunin,  a  Russian,  and  his  followers,  anarchism 
not  only  made  progress  among  radical  workmen  in  some 
places,  but  it  spread  horror  and  dread  throughout  Europe. 
In  the  course  of  a  single  generation  a  Tsar  of  Russia,  an 
empress  of  Austria,  a  king  of  Italy,  a  President  of  France, 
and  even  a  President  of  the  United  States,  fell  victims  to 
anarchist  assassins. 

Marx  was  almost  from  the  first  bitterly  opposed  to  the 
teachings  of  Proudhon.  Socialism  and  anarchism  repre- 
sent very  different  theories  of  organization.  The  anar- 
chists would  destroy  all  authority  above,  so  as  to  establish 
complete  and  extreme  individual  freedom;  the  ideal  of  the 
socialists  was  that  the  state,  reorganized,  should  control 
all  for  the  common  welfare  of  all  the  people.  Upon  the 
great  body  of  men  anarchism  never  had  any  more  effect 
than  to  excite  wondering  curiosity  or  terror;  and  it  never 
did  much  to  affect  socialist  theories  or  methods. 

But  socialism  was  affected  by  a  radical  movement  from 
within.  In  France,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  appeared  leaders  who  asserted  that  the  great  goal 
of  socialism  was  to  be  reached  not  through  slow,  patient 
work  and  persuasion  but  through  violence  and  force;  not 
through  efforts  in  legislatures,  which  were  the  creation  of 
the  middle  classes,  who  always  controlled  them,  but 
through  direct  action  of  the  workers  themselves.  As 
parliaments  had  been  devised  by  the  middle  class,  so  had 
the  working  people  created  an  institution  peculiarly  their 
own,  the  trade  union,  which  they  really  controlled,  and 
which  should  be  their  particular  means  of  bringing  desired 
changes  to  pass.  The  new  movement  was  soon  known  as 
syndicalism  (syndicate  trade  union).  It  spread  rapidly 
into  other  countries,  and  across  the  ocean  into  the  United 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       141 


States,  where  its  adherents  styled  themselves  Industrial 
Workers  of  the  World  (I.  W.  W.). 

Syndicalists  proposed  to  make  the  workingmen's  unions 
more  powerful  by  making  them  larger  and  more  compre- 
hensive, organizing  into  one  big  union  all  the  workers 
employed  in  a  single  industry,  and  then  making  powerful 
alliance  "of  the  large  groups,  so  that  in  time  of  need  workers 
who  resisted  their  employers  could  be  supported  by  their 
brethren  in  gigantic  strikes  or  even  general  strikes  which 
would  paralyze  the  transportation  and  industrial  life  of  the 
nation.  It  was  in  France  that  these  ideas  were  most 
strikingly  carried  out,  though  they  were  tried  also  in 
Russia  and  England  and  elsewhere.  In  the  years  1906-9 
several  efforts  only  partly  successful  were  made  by  French 
workers  to  paralyze  opposition  by  means  of  great  strikes, 
and  in  1910  an  attempt  was  made  to  stop  all  railway  traffic. 
But  the  railway  strike  failed  when  the  government  mobil- 
ized the  strikers  for  military  service  on  the  railways,  thus 
putting  them  in  effect  under  martial  law;  and  on  other 
occasions  not  all  the  workingmen  joined,  and  many  citizen 
volunteers  took  the  place  of  the  strikers.  Syndicalist 
workmen  were  taught  that  there  must  be  no  real  peace 
even  in  the  time  when  strikes  were  not  going  on,  but  that 
capitalism  must  be  damaged  and  diminished  by  secret, 
continual  destruction;  that  laborers  must  do  less  work 
than  they  were  paid  for,  and  that  they  must  injure  the 
product  and  hurt  the  machinery  whenever  they  could. 
Since  on  one  occasion  certain  French  workmen  beginning 
a  strike  had  thrown  their  wooden  shoes  (sabots)  into  the 
machinery  to  ruin  it,  this  destruction  was  often  spoken  of 
as  sabotage. 

The  extremeness  and  often  the  violence  of  the  syndical- 
ists not  only  awakened  the  greatest  apprehension  wherever 
they  made  themselves  known,  but  aroused  much  suspicion 
among  socialists  themselves.  In  the  early  years  of  the 
twentieth  century  the  syndicalist  leaders  in  Liverpool,  in 


Objects  of 
syndicalists 


Sabotage 


Socialism 

and 

syndicalism 


142 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Further 
eflfects  of  the 
Industrial 
Revolution 


Education 


Dublin,  in  Paris,  in  Barcelona,  and  elsewhere,  hoped  to 
bring  about  the  suppression  of  capitalism  and  the  taking 
over  by  workmen  of  property  and  the  means  of  production, 
so  that  the  railways,  factories,  and  mines  should  be  owned 
and  managed  by  the  laborers  who  worked  in  them,  for 
their  profit  and  advantage;  and  some  of  them  hoped  for  a 
new  organization  of  the  state,  which  should  be  but  a  group 
of  industries  or  unions  of  workers,  controlled  completely 
by  the  laborers  within  them. 

V  Meanwhile  profound  changes  had  been  brought  about 
in  thejharacter  and  position  of  tlip  grpgt  hrAy  of  the 
people  through  consequences  which  followed  thp  TnHnstrifll 
Revolution.  Nothing  else  was  so  potent  jn  advancing  de- 
mocracy and  self-government,  education,  the  emancipa- 
tion  of  women,  and  the  spread  of  numerous  liberal  ideas. 
Greafnumbers  of  people  were  brought  together,  and  mere 
association  with  one  another  gave  them  the  quicker,  more 
open,  more  radical  minds  which  come  in  city  life,  the  power 
of  numbers,  and  the  habit  of  acting  together^  However 
wretched  their  condition  often  might  be,  factory  workers 
in  the  towns  were  soon  mentally  more  alert,  more  apt  to 
question  existing  conditions,  better  able  to  comprehend 
changes,  and  more  insistent  that  changes  should  be  made, 
than  the  inhabitants  of  farms  or  little  villages  had  been. 
During  the  course  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  great  ideas 
which  had  first  been  formulated  in  England,  worked  out 
in  the  United  States,  and  afterward  more  grandly  stated 
in  France,  were  followed  by  the  masses  of  the  people  in 
western  Europe.  Gradually  in  Great  Britain,  in  France, 
in  Italy,  in  Belgium,  and  to  a  less  extent  in  the  German 
states,  workingmen  and  rural  laborers  were  admitted  to 
the  franchise;  after  which,  because  they  were  the  majority 
of  the  people,  they  tended  to  get  control  of  the  govern- 
ments as  Marx  had  foretold.  They  themselves,  and  the 
upper  classes  as  well,  saw  that  this  power  could  not  be 
gained,  and  certainly  not  well  used,  unless  they  got  educa- 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION        143 

tion/and  in  the  nineteenth  century,  for  the  first  time  in 
the  history  of  the  world,  it  became  a  great  purpose  to  see 
that  all  men  and  women  should  be  able  to  read  and  to 
writel  Then  when  most  of  the  people  had  got  some 
education  and  some  political  experience,  they  began  to 
demand  reforms  in  government  and  life  which  would  make 
their  lot  better,  and  after  a  while  to  agitate  for  thorough 
changes  to  bring  this  about.,  By  the  beginning  of  the 
twentieth  century  it  was  plain  to  almost  all  that  the  future 
of  the  world  lay  in  democracy,  even  though  as  yet  de- 
mocracy had  not  always  learned  to  act  wisely. 

Finally,  it  was  because  of  the  Industrial  Revolution 
probably  more  than  anything  else  that  the  position  of 
women  was  changed  so  profoundly  in  the  last  hundred 
years.  The  Renaissance,  the  Reformation,  even  the 
French  Revolution,  which  carried  some  men  so  far  for- 
ward, left  women  much  as  they  always  had  been,  inferior 
and  subordinate  to  men.  Down  to  the  time  of  the  new 
factories  and  the  large  machines,  most  of  women's  work 
was  always  done  in  the  home,  under  control  and  super- 
vision of  the  nien,  whose  authority  was  recognized  by  law. 
But  one  of  the  results  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  was  that 
much  of  all  the  work  formerly  done  in  the  home,  spinning, 
weaving,  making  of  clothes,  preserving  food  and  a  part 
of  the  work  of  preparing  it  to  be  eaten,  were  taken  away 
to  be  done  by  factory  workers.  A  large  part  of  such  labor 
had  formerly  been  done  by  women  in  their  homes;  now 
they  went  outside  to  work  for  wages,  which,  after  a  while, 
they  considered  to  be  theirs  and  kept  for  themselves.  In 
this  way  gradually  some  economic  independence  was 
achieved.  About  the  same  time  began  the  great  extension 
of  education  to  women  as  well  as  to  men,  and  presently  the 
movement  for  allowing  women  as  well  as  men  to  vote. 
Moreover,  the  socialist  and  labor  leaders  almost  always 
insisted  on  the  equality  of  women  with  men.  During  the 
nineteenth  century,  therefore,  the  Industrial  Revolution, 


Position  of 

women 

altered 


144  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

with  accompanying  factors,  made  a  greater  change  in  the 
rights  and  position  of  women  than  had  been  effected  by  all 
the  movements  of  the  centuries  before  it.  J 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General :  Johannes  Conrad,  Handworterbuch  der  Staatswissen- 
schafU  8  vols.  (3d  ed.  1909-11);  R.  H.  I.  Palgrave,  Diciimiary  of 
Political  Economy,  3  vols.  (1910-13);  Benjamin  Rand,  Selections 
Illustrating  Economic  History  since  the  Seven  Years*  War  (5th  ed. 
1911). 

The  new  system:  J.  A.  Hobson,  The  EvoliUion  of  Modem 
Capitalism:  a  Study  of  Machine  Production  (ed.  1912)  exceUent; 
Charles  Gide  and  Charles  Rist,  Histoire  des  Doctrines  Econo- 
miques  depuis  les  Physiocrates  jusqu*  a  Nos  Jours  (1919),  trans. 
A  History  of  Economic  Doctrines  (1915),  for  the  doctrine  of  laissez- 
faire;  Werner  Sombart,  Der  Moderne  Capitalismu^,  2  vols.  (1902), 

The  great  changes:  D.  H.  Macgregor,  The  Evolution  of  In- 
dustry (1912);  H.  de  B.  Gibbins,  Economic  and  Industrial  Pro- 
gress of  the  Century  (1903)  best;  Paul  Mantoux,  La  Involution 
Industrielle  au  XVII P  Siecle  (1906),  best  account  of  the  Indus- 
trial Revolution. 

The  Industrial  Revolution  in  England:  W.  W.  Cunningham, 
The  Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Commerce  in  Modem  Times, 
3  vols.  (5th  ed.  1910-12),  volume  III  covers  the  period  1776- 
1850;  G.  H.  Perris,  The  Industrial  History  of  Modern  England 
(1914) ;  Arnold  Toynbee,  Lectures  on  the  Industrial  Revolution  of 
the  18th  Century  in  England  (1884),  the  classic  exposition  in 
English;  A.  P.  Usher,  An  Introduction  to  the  Industrial  History 
of  England  (1920);  G.  T.  Warner,  Landmarks  in  English  Indus- 
trial History  (11th  ed.  1912). 

Trade  unions:  L.  T.  Hobhouse,  The  Labour  Movement  (3d 
ed.  1912);  Sidney  and  Beatrice  Webb,  The  History  of  Trade 
Unionism  (ed.  1920),  Industrial  Democracy  (1902). 

Socialism:  R.  C.  K.  Ensor,  Modern  Socialism,  as  Set  Forth  by 
Socialists  in  Their  Speeches,  Writings,  and  Programmes  (3d  ed. 
1910),  a  convenient  collection  of  sources;  Alfred  Fouillee,  Le 
Socicdisme  et  la  Sociologie  Riformiste  (1909);  Morris  Hillquit, 
Socialism  in  Theory  arid  Practice  (1909);  Thomas  Kirkup,  A 
History  of  Socialism  (5th.  ed.  1913);  J.  R.  Macdonald,  Socialism 
and  Government,  2  vols.  (1909),  The  Socialist  Movement  (1911); 
W.  H.  Mallock,  A  Critical  Examinati(m  of  Socialism  (1907); 


INDUSTRIAL  REVOLUTION       145 

O.  D.  Skelton,  Socialism:  a  Critical  Analysis  (1911),  excellent 
criticism  of;  John  Spargo,  Socialism:  a  Summary  and  Interpreta- 
tion of  Socialist  Principles  (ed.  1909) ;  and  EncyclopSdie  Socialiste 
(ed.  by  Compere-Morel),  8  vols.  (1912-13);  Josef  Stammham- 
mer,  Bibliographie  des  Socialismus  und  Communismus,  3  vols. 
(1893-1909). 

In  France:  W.  D.  Guthrie,  Socialism  before  the  French  Revo- 
lution (1907) ;  Gaston  Isambert,  Les  Idees  Socialistes  en  France 
de  1815  a  1848  (1905) ;  E.  Levasseur,  Histoire  des  Classes  Ouvireres 
et  de  rindustrie  en  France  de  1789  a  1870,  2  vols.  (1903) ;  Georges 
Weill,  Histoire  du  Mouvement  Social  en  France y  1852-1910  (2d 
ed.  1911). 

In  Germany:  Franz  Mehring,  Geschichte  der  Deutschen 
Sozialdemokratie  (1904),  best,  by  a  socialist;  Edgard  Milhaud, 
La  Democratie  Socialiste  Allemande  (1903). 

In  Great  Britain:  M.  Beer,  Geschichte  des  Sozialismus  in 
England  (1913),  ^  History  of  British  Socialism,  2  vols.  (1919-20), 
an  improved  English  version  by  the  author;  C.  W.  Stubbs, 
Charles  Kingsley  and  the  Christian  Social  Movement  (1900). 

Socialist  leaders:  J.  Tchemoff,  Louis  Blanc  (1904);  Ferdi- 
nand Lasalle,  Reden  und  Schriften,  3  vols.  (1892-5) ;  John  Spargo, 
Karl  Marx,  His  Life  and  Work  (1910) ;  Karl  Marx,  Das  Kapital 
(1867),  trans,  by  S.  Moore,  E.  B.  Aveling,  and  E.  Untermann, 
Capital,  a  Critique  of  Political  Economy,  3  vols.  (1907-9) ;  Frank 
Podmore,  Robert  Owen,  a  Biography,  2  vols.  (1906). 

Social  problems:  J.  G.  Brooks,  The  Social  Unrest  (1913); 
F.  A.  Ogg,  Social  Progress  in  Contemporary  Europe  (1912); 
E.  Levasseur,  Questions  Ouvrieres  et  Industrielles  en  France  sous 
la  Troisieme  Republique  (1907);  S.  and  B.  Webb,  Problems  of 
Modern  Industry  (1898). 

Anarchism:  P.  J.  Proudhon,  Qu^est-ce  que  la  Propriety? 
(1840),  trans,  by  B.  R.  Tucker,  What  Is  Property  ?,  2  vols. 
(1902);  E.  A.  Vizetelly,  The  Anarchists  (ed.  1916);  E.  V.  Zenker, 
Anarchism  (Eng.  trans.  1898). 

Syndicalism:  Robert  Hunter,  Violence  and  the  Labor  Move- 
ment (1914) ; Louis  Levine,  The  Labor  Movement  in  France  (1912), 
best;  Paul  Louis,  Histoire  du  Mouvement  Syndical  en  France, 
1789-1910  (2d  ed.  1911),  Le  Syndicalisme  EuropSen  (1914); 
Bertrand  Russell,  Roads  to  Freedom:  Socialism,  Anarchism,  and 
Syndicalism  (1918);  Georges  Sorel,  RSflexions  sur  la  Violence 
(1909),  trans,  by  T.  E.  Huime,  Reflections  on  Violence  (1916); 
J.  Spargo,  Syndicalism,  Industrial  Unionism,  and  Socialism{191^ . 


The  old  r6- 
gime  yielded 
slowly  in 
Britain 


CHAPTER    VII 
THE    UNITED    KINGDOM,    1789-1832 

And  all  these  rights  and  liberties  it  is  our  birthright  to  enjoy  entire; 
unless  where  the  laws  of  our  country  have  laid  them  under  neces- 
sary restraints :  restraints  in  themselves  so  gentle  and  moderate,  as 
will  appear,  upon  farther  inquiry,  that  no  man  of  sense  or  probity 
would  wish  to  see  them  slackened. 

Blackstone,   Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  England   (1765) 
book  i,  chapter  i. 

The  higher  and  middling  orders  are  the  natural  representatives  of 
the  human  race. 

Macaulay,  in  the  Edinburgh  Review^  March  1829. 

The  history  of  Great  Britain  differs  from  that  of  other 
western  European  lands  in  that  the  French  Revolution 
made  no  sharp  break  or  beginning  of  a  new  era  there. 
In  France  and  some  of  the  neighboring  countries  1789 
marks  the  end  of  an  old  regime.  In  England,  where  the 
Revolution  had  no  profound  immediate  effects,  the  old 
system  of  things  never  ended  abruptly,  and  was  not  ser- 
iously disturbed  until  1832,  when,  indeed,  there  was  no 
revolution.  It  was  always  by  gradual  changes ^that  Eng- 
land of  the  eighteenth  century  was  transformed  into  the 
democratic  nation  which  existed  just  before  the  War. 
The  English  people  are  so  conservative  that  for  a  long 
time  they  have  had  no  violent  revolutions  or  changes  very 
abrupt.  At  the  same  time  they  are  so  wisely  liberal 
and  constructive,  that,  continuously  making  changes  as 
changes  seem  needed,  they  have  often  advanced  along  the 

146 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1789-1832    147 


pathway  of  reform  more  quickly  than  any  other  people. 
Others,  like  the  Americans  and  the  French,  have  at  times 
established  a  new  order  of  things,  recording  the  change  in 
a  new  constitution.  The  Americans,  adopting  their  con- 
stitution 1787-9,  for  a  long  while  scarcely  altered  it  at  all. 
The  French  making  several  complete  changes  about  the 
same  time,  several  times  afterward  discarded  their  work 
and  returned  to  an  older  form.  But  the  British  people 
have  no  constitution  in  any  single  document,  and  their 
constitution  shows  better  than  anything  else  how  their 
government  has  been  a  gradual  growth.  It  consists  of 
great  statutes  from  Magna  Carta  to  the  Electoral  Law  of 
1918,  of  all  of  the  lesser  laws  which  continue  in  force,  the 
great  decisions  of  courts,  and  a  body  of  precedent  and 
custom.  The  elementary  student  finds  the  American 
Constitution  in  a  few  pages  near  the  end  of  his  text-book; 
only  gradually  is  he  able  to  discover  the  British  constitu- 
tion. 

In  spite  of  such  gradual  alteration,  the  changes  in  the 
British  Isles  since  1789,  seen  from  a  distance,  are  enor- 
mous. Britain  of  the  twentieth  century  is  a  liberal  demo- 
cracy with  government  vested  in  representatives  of  the 
people,  with  men  and  women  taking  ever  more  decisive 
part  in  ordering  the  affairs  that  affect  them,  and  con- 
stantly striving  to  direct  affairs  in  the  interests  of  the  body 
of  the  people.  The  Britain  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
though  the  lot  of  its  inhabitants  was  better  than  that  of  any 
others  in  Europe,  was  a  land  of  privilege  and  wealth  for 
the  few,  with  power  in  the  hands  of  a  small  number  at  the 
top,  a  land  of  class  distinctions  and  class  privilege,  of 
vested  interests  and  subordination  of  the  many. 

It  was  still  an  age  of  established  religion.  At  the  time 
of  the  Reformation  most  Englishmen  became  Protestants, 
adherents  of  the  Church  of  England.  This  Church,  estab- 
lished by  the  government,  took  for  its  use  the  old  cathe- 
drals and  churches,  and  administered  the  religion  which 


English 
govermnent 
slowly 
changed 


Eighteenth 

century 

England 


Discrimina- 
tion against 
Roman 
Cathohcs 


148 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


all  the  people  were  to  have.  But  some  adhered  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  faith.  In  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth 
centuries  these  English  Catholics  were  put  under  penalties, 
which,  if  enforced,  made  them  outlaws.  They  might  not 
sit  in  parliament  or  hold  public  oflSce,  or  practise  their 
religion  openly,  nor  might  they  have  priests  in  private, 
while  the  law  compelled  them  to  attend  services  of  the 
Church  of  England.  Some  of  the  regulations  were  com- 
monly not  enforced,  but  always  they  could  be  an  instru- 
ment of  oppression  in  enemies'  hands.  There  were  also 
many  Protestants  who  had  desired  reformatipn  different 
from  that  established  by  the  Anglican  Church.  Such  were 
the  Presbyterians,  the  Baptists,  the  Quakers,  and  at  a 
later  time  the  Methodists.  For  a  long  while  now  these 
dissenters  had  been  allowed  to  worship  as  they  wished,  but 
they  also  were  subject  to  discrimination  and  debarred  from 
holding  office  by  the  Test  and  Corporation  Acts  passed  in 
the  seventeenth  century,  though  they  were  now  regularly 
relieved  from  the  operation  of  these  statutes  by  annual 
indemnity  acts. 

The  government  was  a  limited  monarchy,  with  parlia- 
ment the  principal  power.  The  king,  who  as  late  as  the 
sixteenth  century  had  almost  all  the  functions  of  govern- 
ment in  his  hands,  afterward  lost  to  parliament  his 
most  important  powers:  making  laws  and  levying  taxes. 
During  the  eighteenth  century  his  executive  power  and 
control  of  foreign  affairs  were  taken  over  by  the  ministers 
of  his  cabinet  council.  According  to  the  law  the  king  still 
appointed  officials,  commanded  the  army  and  navy,  exe- 
cuted the  laws,  which  could  only  be  passed  when  he  ap- 
proved them,  and  presided  over  the  administration  of 
affairs.  And  it  should  be  noticed  that  it  was  partly  be- 
cause the  statesmen  who  drafted  the  American  Constitution 
believed  that  the  king  of  England  was  really  an  executive 
that  such  powers  as  these  were  given  to  the  president  of  the 
United  States.     Actually,  however,  in  Britain  almost  all 


UNITED  KINGDOM,    1789-1832    149 


of  these  powers  had  been  completely  lost  to  the  ministers 
of  the  cabinet. 

The  cabinet  form  of  government  arose  in  England. 
From  of  old  English  kings  had  had  a  council  of  assistants 
and  advisers  to  help  them  in  governing  their  kingdom. 
In  the  sixteenth  century  this  body  was  known  as  the  Privy 
Council.  In  the  course  of  the  seventeenth  century  the 
Privy  Council  became  too  large,  and  kings  caused  a  few  of 
its  ablest  and  most  trusted  members  to  meet  privately  for 
important  business.  This  followed  contemporary  usage 
in  France,  where  the  meeting  was  often  held  in  one  of  the 
cabinets  or  smaller  rooms  of  the  king.  Gradually  in  Eng- 
land the  small  body  came  to  be  known  as  the  Cabinet 
Council.  It  was  strictly  subordinate  to  the  king,  who 
always  presided  at  its  meetings. 

The  king's  power  had  long  been  declining,  but  in  1714  a 
dynasty  of  German  princes  was  called  to  the  throne.  The 
first  of  them  was  not  only  dependent  on  the  great  leaders 
who  gave  him  support,  but  could  not  speak  English  and 
knew  little  about  the  government  of  his  kingdom.  Ac- 
cordingly, he  soon  stayed  away  from  cabinet  meetings,  and 
in  his  place  a  first  minister  or  prime  minister  presided.  In 
the  period  1714-1760  the  cabinet  ministers,  who  were  the 
leaders  of  parliament,  gradually  took  away  the  king's 
power.  In  1760  George  III  began  a  long  effort  to  get  back 
what  his  predecessors  had  lost,  and  for  a  while  he  had 
much  success.  But  in  reality  he  tried  it  too  late.  After 
a  while  he  gave  up  the  struggle,  and  since  about  1783  the 
executive  power  in  the  British  government  has  been  in  the 
hands  of  the  prime  minister  and  the  cabinet.  Gradually 
it  was  established  that  these  ministers  were  to  be  the 
leaders  of  the  houses  of  parliament,  and  dependent  on  a 
majority  of  the  representatives  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
In  the  British  system  now  the  executive,  the  cabinet 
a  committee  or  part  of  the  legislative,  the  House  of  Com 
mons,  whereas  in  the  American  form  of  government  execu 


is 


Cabinet 
government 


Cabinet 
displaces  the 
king 


George  HI 


150 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Parliament 
once  not 
controlled 
by  the 
people 


Parliament 
in  the 
eighteenth 
century 


Many 
towns  not 
represented 


live  and  legislative  are  separate  completely.  In  the  Amer- 
ican system  the  president  is  indeed  dependent  upon  the 
people  who  elect  him,  but  afterward,  throughout  his  term, 
he  is  practically  uncontrolled,  save  by  public  opinion.  In 
Britain  under  the  cabinet  system  the  executive  depends 
directly  upon  the  approval  of  a  majority  of  the  representa- 
tives  in  the  Commons.  When  it  no  longer  has  this  sup- 
port, it  quickly  passes  from  power. 

In  1789  this  had  by  no  means  completely  developed. 
The  ministry  or  cabinet  was  largely  dependent  upon  par- 
liament, but  in  no  modern  sense  did  parliament  represent 
the  people  of  England.  Less  than  one  man  out  of  ten  could 
vote;  representation  was  not  in  proportion  to  population; 
and  the  franchise  was  dependent  on  property  or  old  right 
to  vote. 

Parliament  consisted  of  the  House  of  Lords  and  the 
House  of  Commons.  The  Lords  were  hereditary  noble 
members.  The  House  of  Commons  was  composed  of 
members  elected  from  the  counties  and  from  some  of  the 
boroughs  or  towns.  From  the  counties  members  were 
elected  by  property-owners  in  accordance  with  a  law 
passed  in  1430.  Most  of  the  members  of  the  Commons 
came  from  the  boroughs.  By  no  means  did  all  of  the  towns 
have  representation — only  those  which  kings  had  formerly 
invited  to  send  members.  For  a  long  time  no  new  ones 
had  been  invited.  Now  in  the  industrial  regions  large 
cities  were  growing,  which  had  no  representation  whatever, 
while  places  once  given  the  right  continued  to  have  it  even 
though  their  population  was  small,  or,  as  in  some  cases,  it 
had  disappeared  altogether.  In  the  boroughs  the  franchise 
was  generally  restricted  to  a  very  few  voters,  who  were 
property  owners  or  had  inherited  their  right  to  vote. 
Wealthy  men  were  easily  able  to  buy  up  the  "decayed'* 
or  "pocket"  boroughs  and  manage  their  representation  as 
they  pleased.  Hence  the  principal  members  of  the  House 
of  Lords,  wealthy  nobles  and  landlords,  got  control  of  a 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1789-1832    151 


great  part  of  the  Commons;  and  when  George  III  tried  to 
regain  the  lost  power  of  the  crown  he  began  his  efforts  by 
buying  members  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

Only  indirectly  and  faintly  did  such  a  parliament  repre- 
sent the  people.  Perhaps  this  could  not  be  helped,  for 
most  of  the  people  could  not  read  or  write,  and  there  were 
not  any  very  effectual  means  of  informing  the  people  about 
politics  or  of  making  their  influence  felt.  Long  before, 
Cromwell  had  tried  to  reform  the  electoral  system,  basing 
representation  on  population,  in  the  modern  way;  but  this 
plan  failed  almost  at  once.  At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century  many  Englishmen  wanted  parliamentary  reform, 
but  their  projects  had  to  do  with  giving  representation  to 
the  larger  places  and  taking  it  from  some  of  the  small  ones. 
Not  many  advocated  representatives  in  proportion  to 
numbers,  because  very  few  believed  that  most  men  should 
vote. 

As  yet  there  was  little  of  democratic  ideals.  The  de- 
mocracy of  Athens  and  other  classical  places  had  been  for 
free  citizens  supported  by  a  much  larger  number  of  slaves; 
and  in  the  city  communities  of  the  Middle  Ages  power  and 
privilege  of  government  were  generally  limited  to  only  a 
few.  Some  teachings  of  the  Christian  religion  seemed  to 
imply  equality,  but  some  of  its  precepts  also  proclaimed  the 
subordination  of  the  many  to  the  few.  From  time  to 
time  there  had  been  teachers  who  asserted  the  equality  of 
men,  but  their  schemes  had  failed  and  their  teachings  were 
regarded  as  false  and  misleading.  Just  before  the  French 
Revolution  Rousseau  and  others  had  declared  that  govern- 
ment should  rest  on  the  consent  of  its  people.  Soon  after, 
the  Americans  wrote  in  their  Declaration  of  Independence 
"All  men  are  created  equal,"  and  a  little  later  the  French 
Revolutionists  asserted  that  men  are  born  and  continue 
equal  and  free.  But  the  French  soon  went  back  to  mon- 
archy and  kings;  and  the  Americans  had  in  their  midst 
black  men  whom  they  did  not  consider,  and  according  to 


Representa- 
tion not 
based  on 
population 


Democracy 

Uttle 

developed 
anywhere 
then 


The  Ameri- 
can and  the 
French 
Revolutions 


152 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  masses 
obey,  not 
make  laws 


Relatively 
good    condi- 
tions in 
Britain 


the  state  constitutions  which  they  drafted  only  a  small 
proportion  of  their  men  had  the  vote.  In  Great  Britain 
at  this  time  there  were  only  a  few  people,  regarded  as 
radicals  or  dangerous  dreamers,  who  believed  that  men 
were  equal  or  that  government  should  be  a  democracy 
based  on  the  votes  of  its  men.  "I  do  not  know,"  said  an 
English  bishop,  "  what  the  mass  of  people  in  any  country 
have  to  do  with  the  laws  but  to  obey  them";  and  there 
were  few,  even  in  the  lower  classes,  at  this  time  who  would 
not  have  acquiesced  in  his  doctrine. 

There  was  then  much  reason  why  the  people  of  England 
should  consider  themselves  well  off  as  things  were  then. 
Most  of  the  land  and  much  of  the  property  were  in  the 
hands  of  a  small  class  of  arist^Mits  at  the  top,  but  there 
was  much  simple  well-being  am^^  the  people.  They  did 
not  control  their  government,  and  it  was  often  directed  in 
the  interests  of  the  upper  classes,  but  the  aristocracy  did 
on  the  whole  give  good  rule.  Furthermore,  there  had  long 
been  limitations  on  the  power  of  king  and  great  lords. 
Men  were  entitled  to  trial  by  a  jury  of  their  neighbors, 
they  could  not  be  imprisoned  without  some  cause  being 
shown,  and  they  were  not  put  to  torture;  while  until  the 
days  of  the  French  Revolution,  on  the  Continent  men  and 
women  had  little  security  against  being  imprisoned  with- 
out trial  or  accusation,  and  against  being  put  to  torture 
to  make  them  confess  or  to  punish  them.  In  Great  Bri- 
tain for  some  time  it  had  been  well  established  that  no 
taxation  could  be  levied  by  the  government  unless  allowed 
by  representatives  in  the  Commons,  and  little  though 
these  members  really  stood  for  the  people,  this  was  a 
limitation  upon  arbitrary  government  which  down  to 
1789  existed  in  no  other  great  country  of  Europe.  Hence 
Englishmen  rejoiced  in  their  country.  "It  requires  no 
proof,"  said  one,  "to  show  that  the  British  Constitution 
is  the  best  that  ever  was  since  the  creation  of  the  world, 
and  it  is  not  possible  to  make  it  better." 


mr 


UNITED   KINGDOM,   1789-1832    153 

Most  of  the  people  were  still  engaged  in  agriculture, 
though  more  and  more  now  made  their  living  in  the 
expanding  industries  of  the  time.  Usually  the  body  of 
the  rural  population  had  little  part  in  the  government,  and, 
even  in  local  government,  offices  were  almost  always 
held  by  the  gentry  from  whom  came  the  justices  of  the 
peace.  The  rural  inhabitants  were  generally  rude,  ignor- 
ant, and  simple;  their  work  was  long  and  hard;  they  were 
frankly  regarded  as  inferior  to  the  upper  classes  who  lived 
in  their  midst.  In  the  towns  there  were  throngs  of  cheap 
laborers,  almost  entirely  at  the  mercy  of  employers.  Com- 
binations or  trade-unions  were  forbidden  by  law,  and  many 
laborers  worked  in  the  midst  of  bad  conditions  and  long 
hours  for  low  wages.  Three  out  of  four  children,  perhaps, 
never  got  education.  As  late  as  1843  it  seems  probable 
that  one  third  of  the  men  and  one  half  of  all  the  women 
could  not  even  sign  their  own  names. 

The  position  of  women  was  inferior  to  that  of  men. 
There  had  until  recently  been  little  work  that  a  woman 
could  do  except  about  the  home.  Usually  they  were  not 
supposed  to  have  any  learning  except  what  pertained  to 
home  duties;  and  if  they  had  education  in  other  things 
they  were  often  advised  to  keep  their  knowledge  a  secret, 
since  female  erudition  was  thought  unwomanly  and  im- 
proper, and  liable  to  be  disliked  by  the  men.  In  1792  Mary 
Grodwin  thought  that  "  women  ought  to  have  representa- 
tives, instead  of  being  arbitrarily  governed,"  but  she  was 
aware  that  this  would  be  laughed  at.  Women  were  not 
allowed  to  vote  or  permitted  to  hold  office,  though  it 
should  be  remembered  that  most  men  also  were  debarred. 
They  might  not  serve  on  juries,  and  they  were  sometimes 
punished  with  harder  punishments  than  men.  Otherwise, 
if  they  remained  unmarried — which  few  women  wished — 
they  had  the  same  legal  status  as  men.  But  married 
women,  the  great  majority,  were  put  on  a  distinctly  differ- 
ent footing.     The  laws  had  been  made  in  an  earlier  time 


The  life  of 
the  people 


Position  of 
women 


Married 
women 


154 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


JEffect  of  the 

French 

Revolution 


Reaction  in 
England 


when  women  were  very  dependent  on  men  for  protection. 
Accordingly,  women  were  expected  to  obey  their  men.  A 
married  woman  had  no  separate  existence  according  to 
the  law,  but  was  a  part  of  her  husband,  who  was  respon- 
sible for  her,  and  had  entire  authority  over  her.  Upon 
marriage  the  husband  became  the  owner  of  the  wife's 
property,  and  the  children  were  legally  his.  If  he  saw  fit, 
he  might  chastise  his  wife.  Finally,  it  should  be  noticed 
that  in  earlier  times  families  were  generally  larger  than 
now,  and  that  a  great  part  of  all  the  energy  and  mental 
activity  of  most  women  was  given  entirely  to  the  bearing 
and  raising  of  children. 

In  British  life  of  the  eighteenth  century  there  was  much 
apathy  and  also  much  contentment  and  disposition  to 
believe  that  things  were  well  enough  as  they  were.  There 
were  some  who  strove  zealously  to  remove  the  disabilities 
from  Catholics  and  Dissenters,  and  effect  parliamentary 
reform;  and  just  before  the  French  Revolution  it  seemed 
that  there  was  fair  prospect  of  chai^ges  being  made.  The 
Revolution  in  France,  however,  actually  delayed  such  a 
movement.  The  conservative  temper  of  the  British 
people  was  shocked  by  the  execution  of  nobles  and  king, 
the  confiscation  of  property,  the  f&daiHental  alteration 
in  the  life  of  the  state.  Moreover,  Britain  was  soon 
involved  in  a  long  and  terrible  struggle  with  France  and 
with  Napoleon,  and  this  made  the  reaction  far  greater. 
Most  of  those  who  had  at  first  hailed  the  Revolution  with 
delight  very  soon  came  to  abhor  it,  or  else  were  regarded 
by  their  fellows  with  suspicion.  Hence  in  England  the 
era  of  reform  was  postponed  for  many  a  year,  and  reaction 
caine  in  its  stead. 

A  whole  series  of  repressive  laws  was  passed.  Those  who 
spoke  or  printed  what  the  government  considered  to  be 
harmful  were  sternly  prosecuted,  and  in  1794  the  Habeas 
Corpus  Act  was  suspended.  There  were  failures  in  the  war 
and  harvests  were  bad  in  England.     So  there  was  much  dis- 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1789-1832    155 


content,  and  radical  reformers,  urged  on  by  the  example 
of  Frenchmen  and  by  the  suffering  at  home,  asked  for 
peace  and  for  parliaments  elected  every  year  by  the  votes 
of  all  the  men.  Then  two  measures  were  passed  which 
made  it  treason  to  speak  or  write  against  the  govern- 
ment, and  practically  took  away  the  right  to  hold  political 
meetings  except  under  government  supervision.  Peace 
came  after  a  while,  but  soon  there  began  the  giant  struggle 
with  Napoleon,  and  the  long  years  when  Britain  held 
out  against  most  of  Europe.  During  these  years  there 
were  not  only  the  hardship  and  exhaustion  and  waste 
which  always  bring  much  discontent,  but  the  changes  of 
the  Industrial  Revolution  were  proceeding  with  a  great 
deal  of  misery,  unrest,  and  agitation.  There  were  not 
wanting  men  who  thought  more  of  altering  conditions 
which  they  disliked  at  home  than  of  standing  together 
against  the  enemy  abroad.  For  the  most  part,  however, 
the  British  people  understood  that  the  first  of  all  tasks  was 
that  of  saving  their  country;  and  so  they  turned  away 
from  reform  for  the  time.  The  government  kept  sternly 
on  at  its  task,  until  at  last  Napoleon  was  overthrown  and 
the  Revolutionary  period  ended. 

Britain  in  1815  confronted  conditions  in  many  respects 
like  those  in  1918,  after  Germany  had  been  overthrown. 
The  war  had  been  very  expensive.  It  had  been  necessary 
to  purchase  huge  quantities  of  provisions  and  obtain 
supplies  at  a  time  when  labor  was  scarce  and  prices 
were  high,  while  large  sums  had  been  loaned  to  Britain's 
allies  on  the  Continent;  so  that  the  end  of  the  struggle 
found  the  national  debt  amounting  to  £840,000,000  with 
annual  interest  of  £32,000,000 — sums  which  formerly 
would  have  been  regarded  as  ruinous.  There  had  been 
inevitable  dislocation  of  business,  with  heavy  losses. 
Prices  had  been  high  and  there  was  much  inflation.  Now 
prices  began  to  fall,  business  slackened,  trade  with  other 
countries  was  poor,  and  many  who  had  served  in  the  army 


The  war 

engrosses 

attention 


Difficulties 
after  the  war 


156 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Unrest  and 
discontent 


Changes 
demanded 


Stricter 
repression 


The 

Six  Acts 
of  1819 


or  the  navy  were  dismissed  and  found  it  difficult  to  get 
employment.  Added  to  this  was  the  general  spirit  of 
unrest  and  agitation  which  inevitably  comes  after  long 
war.  It  was  not  only  a  time  of  slackened  industry,  but 
the  new  labor-saving  machines  made  it  harder  for  all 
to  have  work.  Agitators  found  it  easy  to  get  men  and 
women  to  hearken  to  new  doctrines  which  often  people 
did  not  understand  but  which  they  hoped  would  bring 
better  conditions.  There  was  much  misery  and  distress; 
hence  men  were  eager  for  changes.  All  sorts  of  doctrines 
were  taught.  Some  thought  that  parliaments  should  be 
elected  every  year;  some  demanded  universal  suffrage; 
some  would  have  repudiated  the  national  debt.  In 
1816  men  were  calling  for  the  destruction  of  British  com- 
merce and  the  putting  of  workmen  back  on  to  the  land, 
as  in  1918  men  wanted  capitalism  ended,  and  the  mines 
and  factories  given  to  those  who  toiled  in  them. 

Alarmed  at  these  radical  demands,  the  government 
and  the  upper  classes,  guided  by  conservative  and  re- 
actionary leaders,  carried  through  .repressive  measures. 
In  1817  another  law  was  passed  to  prevent  seditious 
meetings,  and  the  Habeas  Corpus  Act  again  was  sus- 
pended. Bad  harvests  caused  distress  and  increased 
unrest.  There  was  some  disturbance,  but  the  govern- 
ment sternly  prosecuted  those  who  took  part.  In  1819 
the  so-called  "Six  Acts"  were  passed.  Magistrates  were 
instructed  to  seize  arms  and  prevent  unlawful  drilling; 
those  who  offended  were  to  be  tried  at  once;  those  who 
published  seditious  libels  were  to  be  punished;  a  prohibi- 
tive tax  was  put  upon  the  cheap  pamphlets  which  cir- 
culated about  among  the  masses;  and  meetings,  in  town 
or  in  country,  were  prohibited  unless  summoned  by  the 
local  official.  These  laws,  though  at  the  time  they  seemed 
justified  by  prevailing  and  dangerous  conditions,  seriously 
infringed  upon  Englishmen's  rights.  But  they  were  only 
of  temporary  duration.     The  unrest  of  the  years  after 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1789-1832    157 


the  war  largely  disappeared.  Economic  conditions  had 
been  bad.  As  soon  as  conditions  improved,  popular  dis- 
content and  repressive  measures  both  passed  away. 

The  men  who  were  guiding  the  destinies  of  England 
considered  things  from  the  point  of  view  of  their  class, 
and  often,  perhaps,  of  their  own  selfish  interests;  but  it 
must  also  be  remembered  that  they  were  facing  difficult 
problems  in  the  most  difficult  times  that  men  had  known 
for  generations.  In  a  brief  span  of  years  one  of  the 
mightiest  of  all  revolutions  had  arisen  across  the  Channel, 
overturning  old  systems  and  kingdoms,  and  going  like  a 
storm  over  Europe;  then  came  the  greatest  of  military 
commanders,  and  Europe  was  tormented  with  fire  and 
with  sword,  with  the  march  of  armies  and  rush  of  events, 
year  after  year,  until  at  last  the  disturbers  were  cast  down 
and  a  mighty  reaction  began.  In  Britain,  as  in  other 
countries,  there  was  much  unhappiness  and  justifiable 
discontent,  and  reforms  were  sought  which  ought  to  have 
been  made.  But  many  of  the  things  that  brought  dis- 
content were  inevitable  results  of  the  war,  and  could  only 
be  cured  slowly  by  operation  of  time.  To  the  rulers  and 
the  upper  classes,  and  generally  to  conservative  people, 
the  principal  task  seemed  to  be  conserving  the  institutions 
just  fought  for;  and  they  were  determined  to  oppose  the 
reformers  and  agitators  who  clamored  for  radical  change. 
Actually  at  this  time  Britain  was  more  liberal  than  any 
of  the  other  countries  near  by. 

This  was  best  shown  in  foreign  relations.  England 
soon  withdrew  from  alliance  with  the  powers  who  were 
trying  partly  to  restore  and  perpetuate  the  things  which 
had  existed  before  the  Revolution.  In  1822  she  dis- 
approved of  intervention  to  restore  absolutism  in  Spain, 
though  she  did  not  resist  French  occupation.  A  British 
fleet  prevented  complete  triumph  of  the  reactionary  party 
in  Portugal.  Meanwhile  Britain  had  seen  the  Continental 
nations,  urged  on  by  France,  consider  undertaking  the 


The  task 
of  the 
rulers 


Time 

needed  for 
amendment 


Foreign 
affairs 


158 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


TheSpAnish- 

American 

countries 


Death  of 
George  m 


His  failtires 


reconquest  of  Spain's  revolted  colonies  in  America.  The 
British  government  invited  the  United  States  to  join  in 
action  to  prevent  this.  The  American  government  re- 
fused to  join  Britain,  but  proclaimed  by  itself  the  "Mon- 
roe Doctrine,"  which  announced  that  intervention  by  a 
European  power  against  an  independent  American  state 
would  be  regarded  as  an  unfriendly  act.  In  reality  there 
was  little  that  the  United  States  could  have  done  to 
prevent  any  European  action.  Far  more  eflFectual  was 
the  opposition  of  Great  Britain,  because  she  had  complete 
command  of  the  sea.  In  reality  the  independence  of  the 
Spanish-American  countries  was  maintained  by  the  sea 
power  of  Britain. 

Changing  times  were  now  marked  by  the  passing  of 
statesmen  and  rulers  identified  with  the  old  order.  George 
III  died  in  1820.  Sixty  years  before  he  had  come  to  the 
throne  a  young  man  of  much  promise.  He  was  brave,  of 
good  appearance,  dignified,  simple,  and  excellent  in  family 
life.  But  he  had  neither  a  large  mind  nor  any  of  the 
qualities  of  a  statesman;  he  was  obstinate,  often  sullen, 
narrow-minded,  not  able  to  change  with  the  changing 
times;  and  he  was  determined  to  maintain  that  which 
existed  and  win  back  the  lost  powers  of  the  crown. 

His  failures  and  even  his  success  had  both  cost  his  coun- 
try dear.  He  had  striven  to  make  the  American  colonies 
subservient,  and  in  the  end  the  most  important  were  lost. 
A  little  later,  in  1800,  his  minister  Pitt  had  brought  about 
the  union  of  Ireland  and  Great  Britain.  Had  the  Irish 
acquiesced  in  this  union,  it  would  have  been  the  best 
thing  for  the  people  of  both  islands,  and  it  seems  now 
that  they  might  have  acquiesced  had  the  Roman  Catho- 
lics, three  fourths  of  the  Irish  population,  received  the 
civil  and  political  rights  denied  them  because  of  their 
religion.  Pitt,  the  prime  minister,  favored  enfranchise- 
ment of  these  Catholics,  and  perhaps  promised  it  to  the 
Irish  leaders;  but  George  HI  opposed   such   inflexible 


I 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1789-^1832    159 


resistance  that  at  last  the  minister  yielded.  More  than 
a  quarter  of  a  century  then  elapsed  before  the  Irish  Catho- 
lics received  what  they  wanted,  and  then  it  was  too  late 
to  make  them  loyal  and  grateful.  Since  then  Irishmen 
have  so  often  opposed  the  Union  that  men  have  sometimes 
thought  George  III  lost  Ireland  to  the  British  crown  al- 
most as  completely  as  he  lost  the  United  States.  In  the 
later  years  of  his  reign  the  old  king  was  insane,  but  so  long 
as  he  had  influence  it  was  thrown  against  reform  or  any 
change,  and  reformers  saw  clearly  that  little  was  to  be 
expected  so  long  as  he  lived. 

George  IV  (1820-1830)  had  neither  character  nor  at- 
tainments to  inspire  respect  or  assist  any  constructive 
effort;  but  during  the  decade  of  his  reign  there  was  con- 
stant movement  of  great  forces  tending  toward  a  change, 
and  presently  the  diflficult  beginning  of  a  series  of  great 
reforms.  The  movement  was  more  rapid  in  the  years  of  the 
next  king,  the  simple,  democratic,  and  rather  foolish  Wil- 
liam IV  (1830-1837).  Indeed  the  electoral  reform  law 
passed  in  1832  was  to  mark  the  beginning  of  a  new  era  in 
British  political  life;  and  the  first  years  of  the  reign  of  the 
next  monarch,  Victoria  (1837-1901),  may  be  taken  de- 
finitely as  the  beginning  of  the  new  age. 

Great  forces  had  been  operating  for  some  time  to  bring 
about  change.  The  existing  political  system  had  come 
down  from  a  time  when  nobles,  great  landowners,  and 
political  leaders  had  taken  away  the  power  of  the  king; 
but  now  the  wealth  of  the  nation  was  held  not  only  by 
aristocratic  landlords  but  by  manufacturers  and  merchants 
also  and  they  insisted  upon  a  share  in  the  government. 
Parliamentary  representation  also  was  based  on  conditions 
largely  passed  away.  Once  the  people  of  England  had 
been  mostly  engaged  in  agriculture,  with  the  best  farming 
lands  in  the  east  and  the  south.  Then  it  had  been  very 
proper  for  political  power  and  representation  to  be  in  those 
districts.     But   the   Industrial   Revolution    had    altered 


His 


successors 


Forces 
tending 
toward 
change 


160 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Desire  for 
parliamen- 
tary reform 


Jeremy 
Bentham 


conditions.  The  coal  was  in  south  Wales,  or  the  west  or 
the  north,  and  the  chief  iron  deposits  not  far  away  from 
them.  Therefore,  as  the  British  population  grew  now 
most  rapidly  in  connection  with  industrial  development, 
people  went  to  the  west  or  the  midlands  or  the  north, 
and  by  1820  the  larger  part  of  the  population  was  in  these 
districts. 

There  had  been  a  powerful  and  growing  movement  in 
Britain  for  parliamentary  and  political  reform  before  the 
time  of  the  French  Revolution,  but  the  excesses  in  France, 
the  wars,  and  the  violence  of  some  leaders  in  England 
caused  most  people  to  look  upon  all  projects  of  reform 
with  suspicion  and  dislike.  But  at  last  this  time  was 
gone.  By  1820  the  generation  that  remembered  the 
Revolution  was  passing,  and  by  1830  men  were  coming 
to  power  who  thought  less  about  Napoleon  than  prob- 
lems of  the  present,  and  who  no  longer  had  to  think  of 
change  and  reform  as  things  dangerous,  or  perhaps  help- 
ful to  the  foe.  Therefore,  the  reform  movement  which  had 
been  left  to  violent  writers  and  agitators  of  lowly  station, 
was  now  taken  up  by  people  of  higher  position,  and  be- 
came rather  a  movement  of  the  middle  class  than  of  the 
lower  classes,  as  it  had  been. 

Some  of  this  change  was  owing  to  the  writings  of  a 
group  of  celebrated  men,  of  whom  the  most  important 
was  Jeremy  Bentham.  He  had  expounded  the  idea  that 
the  end  for  which  men  should  strive  was  always  the 
"greatest  happiness  of  the  greatest  number";  and  declar- 
ing that  the  British  political  system  mostly  served  the 
interests  of  the  upper  class  who  controlled  it,  he  ad-' 
vocated  extension  of  political  power  to  the  people.  The 
influence  of  his  teaching  was  spread  abroad  by  friends  and 
disciples,  and  presently  had  great  influence  with  statesmen 
like  Durham  and  Peel.  After  all,  reforms  are  usually 
brought  about  by  leaders  who  carry  them  forward,  not 
by  urging  from  the  mass  of  the  people. 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1789-1832     161 


Several  important  reforms  were  now  made  while  the 
government  was  still  controlled  by  conservatives  and 
"Tories."  First  came  the  reform  of  the  criminal  law. 
In  the  Middle  Ages,  in  England  as  elsewhere,  suppression 
of  crime  had  been  a  diflScult  matter.  There  were  many 
rude  and  lawless  people,  to  whom  might  meant  right; 
there  was  no  effective  system  of  police;  and  there  were  not 
enough  jails  and  prisons.  To  offset  this,  great  severity 
was  used  and  numerous  offences  were  punished  with 
death.  This  system,  like  many  other  things,  had  lingered 
on  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and, 
while  to  some  liberal  reformers  it  seemed  barbarous  and 
absurd,  to  a  great  many  it  seemed  right  because  it  had  so 
long  been.  As  late  as  1819  there  were  about  200  felonies 
punished  by  hanging.  Death  was  the  penalty  for  picking 
a  pocket  of  twelve  pence;  it  was  also  the  penalty  for  mur- 
der. It  should  be  said  that  the  savage  harshness  of  this 
code  was  somewhat  mitigated  by  a  practice  which  had 
gradually  grown  up.  In  the  Middle  Ages,  ecclesiastics 
had  had  the  right  to  be  tried  in  separate  courts,  where 
they  were  punished  less  severely  than  they  would  have 
been  in  civil  courts,  since  the  Church  was  not  willing  to 
put  criminals  to  death.  This  right  was  known  as  "bene- 
fit of  clergy."  It  was  greatly  desired  by  criminals,  and 
when  tried  they  were  apt  to  assert  that  they  were  clergy- 
men. It  early  came  to  be  a  custom  to  allow  this  claim  to 
all  who  could  read;  and  by  a  statute  of  1705  the  privilege 
was  allowed,  in  the  case  of  a  great  many  crimes,  to  any  one 
who  wished  to  have  .it  on  the  occasion  of  his  first  offence. 
That  is  to  say,  while  the  criminal  code  ordained  death 
for  a  great  number  of  crimes,  actually  the  delinquent 
might  in  many  instances  escape  severe  punishment  by 
asking  for  benefit  of  clergy.  Even  so,  however,  the  exist- 
ence of  such  ferocious  laws  was  a  grievous  thing,  and 
brought  about  much  suffering  and  debasement  of  char- 
acter; so  that  reform  of  the  criminal  law  was  sought  by 


Reform 
of  the 
criminal  law 


Benefit 
of  clergy 


162 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Sir  Samuel 
Romilly  and 
Sir  Robert 
Peel 


Discrimina- 
tions against 
Dissenters 
removed, 
1828 


Catholic 
Emancipa- 
tion, 1829 


many  liberal  spirits  of  the  time.  The  work  taken  up 
especially  by  Sir  Samuel  Romilly,  was  carried  forward 
by  Sir  Robert  Peel.  In  1823  a  law  was  passed  which 
abolished  one  hundred  capital  offences;  by  1837  the 
number  of  crimes  punished  by  death  was  only  six.  Benefit 
of  clergy  was  abolished  in  1827,  and  a  modern  police  force 
established  in  London  ten  years  later .  Meanwhile  other 
improvements  were  made.  In  1815  punishment  of 
offenders  by  putting  them  in  the  pillory  was  done  away 
with,  and  the  whipping  of  women  a  few  years  later.  A 
more  humane  spirit  was  evident  also  in  1824  in  the  found- 
ing of  the  Royal  Society  for  the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to 
Animals.  Ten  years  later  the  baiting  of  bulls  and  cock- 
fighting  were  forbidden. 

At  this  time  also  religious  discriminations  were  re- 
moved. In  England  the  majority  of  the  people  were  of  the 
Church  of  England.  After  1660  the  triumph  of  the 
Anglican  Church  had  been  complete,  and  a  code  of  laws 
was  passed  against  all  who  dissented  from  it.  The  Tolera- 
tion Act  of  1689  had  in  effect  given  freedom  of  worship  to 
Protestant  Dissenters,  but  there  continued  to  hang  over 
them  the  Corporation  Act  of  1661  and  the  Test  Act  of 
1673,  by  which  they  were  debarred  from  holding  political 
oflSce,  since  this  was  conditional  on  taking  the  sacrament 
according  to  the  Church  of  England.  These  laws  were 
not  stringently  enforced,  and  were  indeed  made  ineffectual 
through  frequent  acts  of  indemnity;  yet  they  remained  on 
the  books.  Now  at  last  in  1828  they  were  repealed,  and 
all  Protestants  given  equality  in  the  state. 

This  brought  no  relief  to  the  Catholics.  Roman 
Catholics  were  not  numerous  in  England,  but  they  con- 
stituted most  of  the  population  of  Ireland,  and  there  for  a 
hundred  years  religious  disabilities  had  kept  them  in  a 
degraded  and  inferior  station.  Irish  Catholics  had  been 
allowed  to  vote  in  elections  since  1793,  but  they  were  not 
permitted    to    hold    oflSce.     Complete    enfranchisement 


;V- 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1789-1832    163 


had  been  hoped  for  and  expected  at  the  time  of  the  Union 
with  Great  Britain,  but  nothing  had  been  accomplished. 
Now  the  movement  was  taken  up  by  the  Irish  leader, 
Daniel  O'Connell,  who  founded  the  Catholic  Association 
in  1823  and  soon  caused  such  vast  excitement  among  the 
Irish  that  the  British  ministry  thought  it  best  to  yield. 
In  1829  a  bill  for  Roman  Catholic  Emancipation  was 
passed,  by  the  terms  of  which  the  oaths  of  abjuration, 
allegiance,  and  supremacy,  as  well  as  denial  of  belief  in 
transubstantiation,  by  which  Catholics  had  been  kept 
from  office,  were  done  away  with,  and  civil  and  political 
equality  given  to  Catholics  for  the  first  time  in  the  British 
Isles  since  the  sixteenth  century.  These  great  changes 
marked  the  formal  ending  of  an  old  era  of  religious  pre- 
judice and  political  discrimination. 

In  spite  of  these  reforms,  however,  most  of  the  inhabi- 
tants were  still  debarred  from  political  rights,  and  parlia- 
ment, which  controlled  the  government,  very  poorly  repre- 
sented the  people.  The  next  great  amendment,  therefore, 
lay  in  reforming  parliament  and  extending  the  franchise. 
This  was  only  gradually  accomplished  in  the  course  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  but  the  beginning  made  in  1832 
seemed  so  momentous  a  thing  as  to  mark  a  turning-point 
in  the  history  of  England. 

In  the  House  of  Commons  there  were  658  members. 
Those  returned  from  the  counties  were  generally  de- 
pendent upon  the  great  landed  proprietors  there.  By 
far  the  greater  number  came  from  the  parliamentary 
boroughs,  and  in  them  the  old  system  was  particularly 
bad.  Originally,  perhaps,  there  had  been  some  idea 
of  making  the  system  roughly  representative,  by  hav- 
ing those  places  return  members  which  were  best  able 
to  give  money  to  the  king;  though  always,  it  would 
seem,  some  places  were  given  representation  not  because 
of  population  and  importance  but  since  it  was  believed 
that  their  members  would  vote  as  the  sovereign  desired. 


Daniel 
O'Connell 


Reform  of 
parliament 


The  imre- 
formed 
House  of 
Commons 


164  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

In  course  of  time  the  inequalities  became  more  striking, 
as  places  which  sent  members  to  the  Commons  stood  still 
or  declined  in  population,  while  other  places,  rapidly 
growing,  had  no  representation  whatever.  Neither  Leeds 
nor  Birmingham  nor  Manchester  nor  SheflBeld  returned 
any  members,  though  they  were  coming  to  be  the  very 
center  of  England;  but  there  continued  to  be  representa- 
tion for  Old  Sarum,  which  had  almost  no  people,  for 
Gatton,  a  gentleman's  park,  and  for  Dunwich  almost 
completely  under  the  waters  of  the  North  Sea.  In  most 
of  the  boroughs  there  were  only  a  few  voters,  entirely 
under  the  influence  of  some  great  man  near  by,  or  else 
very  willing  to  be  purchased.  In  some  of  the  larger 
places  there  were  spirited  election  contests,  but  usually 
candidates  were  regularly  chosen  at  the  order  of  the  mag- 
nate who  owned  the  borough  or  controlled  it.  It  was 
well  known  that  electors  could  be  bribed,  and  on  one  oc- 
casion a  borough  advertised  itself  for  sale  to  the  highest 
bidder.  In  1793,  it  was  said  that  309  members  were  re- 
turned by  private  patrons,  163  of  them  by  members  of  the 
House  of  Lords;  and  just  before  the  reform,  that  487 
came  into  the  House  through  the  influence  of  144  peers 
Control  of  and  123  powerful  commoners.  That  is  to  say,  the  House 
the  House  of  Commons  was  controlled  by  members  of  the  House  of 
Lords  or  other  wealthy  men  who  desired  influence  and 
power.  And  much  power  could  be  secured  thus,  since  the 
government  of  the  realm  now  rested  upon  the  House  of 
Commons.  Great  men  who  controlled  votes  in  the 
Commons  could  not  only  help  to  pass  measures  which 
they  wished,  but  were  apt  to  get  bribes,  pensions,  lucrative 
oflBces,  contracts,  and  shares  in  government  loans  on  very 
favorable  terms.  Altogether,  it  was  a  system  under 
which  most  of  the  people  had  no  vote,  in  which  the  repre- 
sentation was  not  apportioned  according  to  the  population, 
and  in  which  the  great  aristocrats  and  political  managers 
controlled  the  government  of  England  and  Scotland. 


-^^ 


>8 

t   -■■5 


M  V  a  D  o      ^  y  I  a  M  t 


8 

3  § 


o 


En 


f 


111 


I 


o 


UNITED   KINGDOM,    1789-1832     165 


The  long  effort  to  get  all  this  changed  received  great 
impetus  when  it  got  the  support  of  the  powerful  middle 
classes,  whom  the  Industrial  Revolution  had  made  im- 
portant, but  who  remained  with  almost  no  part  in  govern- 
ment affairs.  The  movement  was  led  by  Lord  John 
Russell,  of  one  of  the  great  Whig  houses;  and  under  his 
wise  and  moderate  leadership  it  gained  strength  year  after 
year.  The  Tories,  under  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  re- 
sisted; but  in  the  general  election  of  1830,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  William  IV,  the  Whigs  triumphed. 

Immediately  parliamentary  reform  was  undertaken. 
In  1831  a  bill  was  brought  into  the  Commons,  but  defeated 
there.  The  ministers  then  had  the  king  dissolve  parlia- 
ment. In  the  general  election  that  followed  there 
was  enormous  popular  excitement.  The  Whigs  again 
won  a  majority,  and  immediately  a  second  bill  was 
brought  in,  which  passed  the  Commons  by  a  handsome 
majority;  but  again  the  Lords  threw  it  out.  Then 
there  were  riots  in  the  cities  and  violence  by  mobs, 
and  such  an  outburst  of  popular  feeling  that  the  Peers 
were  terrified  at  it.  When  in  the  spring  of  1832  a  third  bill 
was  passed  in  the  Commons,  the  Lords  dared  not  openly 
reject  it  but  tried  to  destroy  it  by  amendments.  Ex- 
citement now  became  furious,  and  people  refused  to  pay 
taxes.  England,  indeed,  was  at  the  brink  of  revolution. 
After  a  period  of  great  confusion  the  king  agreed  that  a 
sufficient  number  of  new  Peers  should  be  created  to  pass 
the  bill  in  the  Lords,  an  old  device,  which  had  been  used 
before  and  was  to  be  threatened  again.  But  this  was  not 
needed,  for  some  of  the  Lords  abstained  from  voting,  and 
in  1832  the  bill  was  made  law. 

The  Parliamentary  Reform  Law  of  1832  is  one  of  the 
great  landmarks  in  English  constitutional  history.  It 
altered  a  system  which  had  been  little  changed  for  four 
hundred  years,  and  ended  the  old  political  arrangement. 
But  it  seems  a  less  complete  change  now  than  then.     By 


Stronger 
movement 
for  reform 


Passing  of 
the    Reform 
Law 


The  Reform 
Law  of 
1832 


166  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

no  means  did  the  leaders  believe  in  universal  suffrage  nor 
did  they  design  to  make  representation  strictly  propor- 
tional to  numbers.  These  things  were  not  brought  about 
until  another  half  century  had  passed.  The  law  of  1832 
increased  the  county  representation,  disfranchised  the 
"rotten"  boroughs,  deprived  some  of  the  small  ones  of 
one  of  their  members,  and  gave  representation  to  large 
places  previously  without  it.  The  franchise  was  somewhat 
extended  in  the  counties,  and  in  the  boroughs  the  vote 
was  given  to  householders  paying  a  rental  of  ten  pounds  a 
year.  Previously  in  the  British  Isles  one  person  out  of 
forty-eight  might  vote,  and  the  franchise  was  con- 
trolled by  the  upper  classes;  now  the  electorate  was 
doubled,  from  half  a  million  to  a  million,  and  the  franchise 
was  controlled  by  the  middle  class  as  well  as  the  upper. 
The  significance  of  this  change  is  not  that  it  made  England 
a  democracy,  for  no  country  in  the  world  was  one  at  this 
time,  except  the  United  States  of  America  which  had  just 
been  greatly  extending  the  franchise,  but  that  it  began 
the  process  which,  after  many  years,  was  to  establish 
democracy  in  the  British  Isles  also. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General  histories:  A.  L.  Cross,  A  History  of  England  and 
Greater  Britain  (1914),  the  best  short  history  for  reference, 
A  Shorter  History  of  England  and  Greater  Britain  (1920),  con- 
taining additional  excellent  chapters  down  to  1920;  and  more 
particularly  about  this  period :  J.  A.  R.  Marriott,  England  since 
Waterloo  (1913);  The  Political  History  of  Englandy  volume  X: 
1760  to  1801,  by  the  Rev.  W.  Hunt  (1905),  volume  XI:  1801  to 
1837,  by  G.  C.  Brodrick  and  J.  Fotheringham  (1906);  J.  F. 
Bright,  History  of  England,  5  vols.  (1884-1904) ;  and  best  of  all, 
Sir  Spencer  Walpole,  History  of  jj^ngland  since  1815,  6  vols, 
(revised  ed.  1902-5),  based  on  thorough  study  of  contemporary 
accounts. 

Biographies:  A.  G.  Stapleton,  The  Political  Life  of  George 
Canning,  3  vols.  (1831) ;  J.  F.  Bagot  (editor),  George  Canning  and 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1789-1832    167 

His  Friends,  2  vols.  (1909) ;  G.  M.  TrevelyMi,  Lord  Grey  of  the 
Reform  Bill  (1920) ;  Sir  G.  O.  Trevelyan,  The  Life  and  Letters  of 
Lord  Macaulay,  2  vols.  (1876),  most  fascinating  and  instructive; 
J.  H.  Rose,  William  Pitt  and  National  Revival  (1911),  William 
Pitt  and  the  Great  War  (1911);  Spencer  Walpole,  Life  of  Lord 
John  Russell,  2  vols.  (1879) ;  Sir  Herbert  Maxwell,  The  Life  of 
Wellington,  2  vols.  (3d  ed.  1900). 

Political  conditions  and  parliamentary  reform:  Sir  T.  E. 
May,  Constitutional  History  of  England  since  the  Accession  of 
George  III  (edited  and  continued  by  Francis  Holland),  3  vols. 
(1912);  E.  and  A.  G.  Porritt,  The  Unreformed  House  of  Com- 
mons, 2  vols.  (ed.  1909) ;  J.  R.  M.  Butler,  The  Passing  of  the  Great 
Reform  Bill  (1914),  best  study  of  the  subject. 

The  government  of  the  United  Kingdom :  A.  L.  Lowell,  The 
Government  of  England,  2  vols.  (ed.  1912),  best;  Sir  William  An- 
son, The  Law  and  Custom  of  the  Constitution,  3  vols,  (ed.,  1907- 
9);  Walter  Bagehot,  The  English  Constitution  (ed.  1911);  A.  V. 
Dicey,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Law  of  the  Constitution 
(8th  ed.  1915);  Sidney  Low,  The  Governance  of  England  (ed. 
1914);  Sir  Courtney  Ilbert,  Parliament  (1911). 

Conservatism  and  change :  W.  L.  Blease,  A  Short  History  of 
English  Liberalism  (1913),  very  informing;  T.  E.  Kebbel,  History 
of  Toryism  (1886),  for  the  period  1783-1881. 

Liberal  and  radical  thinkers:  P.  A.  Brown,  The  French 
Revolution  in  English  History  (1918);  W.  L.  Davidson,  Political 
Thought  in  England:  the  Utilitarians  from  Bentham  to  J.  S.  Mill 
(1915);  Sir  Leslie  Stephen,  The  English  Utilitarians  (1900); 
C.  M.  Atkinson,  Life  of  Jeremy  Bentham  (1905) ;  E.  I.  Carlyle, 
William  Cobbett  (1904);  Graham  Wallas,  The  Life  of  Francis 
Place  (1898). 

Catholic  Emancipation:  Bernard  Ward,  The  Dawn  of  the 
Catholic  Revival,  1781-1803  (1909),  The  Eve  of  Catholic  Eman- 
cipation,  1803-1829,  3  vols.  (1912),  The  Sequel  to  Catholic  Eman- 
cipation, 1830-1850,  2  vols.  (1915);  W.  E.  H.  Lecky,  Leaders  of 
Public  Opinion  in  Ireland,  2  vols.  (ed.  1903). 

The  law:  Edward  Jenks,  A  Short  History  of  the  English  Law 
(1912),  excellent;  Sir  J.  F.  Stephens,  History  of  the  Criminal  Law 
of  England,  3  vols.  (1883). 


Abolition  of 
slavery  in 
the  colonies, 
1833 


CHAPTER    VIII 
THE  UNITED  KINGDOM,   1832-1867 

I  consider  the  reform  bill  a  final  and  irrevocable  settlement  of  a  great 
constitutional  question — a  settlement  which  no  friend  to  the  peace 
and  welfare  of  this  country  would  attempt  to  disturb.     .     .     . 
Address  of  Sir  Robert  Peel  to  his  constituents  at  Tamworth, 
1834:    Annual  Register^  183^  (Chronicle),  p.  341. 

That  any  form  of  Government  which  fails  to  effect  the  purposes  for 
which  it  was  designed,  and  does  not  fully  and  completely  represent 
the  whole  people,  who  are  compelled  to  pay  taxes  to  its  support 
and  obey  the  laws  resolved  upon  by  it,  is  unconstitutional,  tyranni- 
cal, and  ought  to  be  amended  or  resisted. 

Chartist  Petition,  1842,  Hansard,  Parliamentary  Debates,  3d  ser. 

Ixii,  1373. 

In  the  Winter  of  1833  the  first  reformed  parliament 
assembled,  and  at  once  proceeded  to  memorable  tasks. 
For  a  long  time  leaders  like  Wilberforce  and  the  father 
of  the  historian  Macaulay  had  denounced  slavery  in  lands 
subject  to  Great  Britain  and  had  striven  to  have  it  done 
away  with.  In  1807  the  slave  trade  had  been  stopped, 
but  slavery  continued  to  exist  in  the  West  Indies.  Now 
it  was  brought  to  an  end.  The  planters  were  compensated 
with  £20,000,000  of  public  money.  The  negroes  were  no 
longer  to  be  slaves,  but  they  were  to  remain  bound  as 
apprentices  for  seven  more  years.  It  was  only  where 
slavery  was  violently  overthrown,  as  it  was  in  the  Ameri- 
can South  by  the  Civil  War,  that  servitude  was  abolished 
completely  at  once. 

In  earlier  times  there  had  always  been  a  great  deal  of 

168 


UNITED   KINGDOM,    1832-1867    169 


labor  by  children,  but  while  manufacturing  was  done  in 
the  home,  this  had  seemed  proper  enough.  Now  as 
workers  were  brought  into  factories,  the  condition  of  the 
children  employed  there  attracted  more  attention.  Chil- 
dren, as  young  as  six  years,  were  made  to  work  for  long 
hours  under  conditions  ruinous  to  health  and  not  allowing 
development  of  body  and  mind.  Protest  against  this  had 
been  made  in  Manchester  fifty  years  before,  and  factory 
legislation  in  1802  and  1819  had  done  a  little  to  remedy 
the  evils.  It  was  difficult  to  accomplish  anything  that 
would  really  better  conditions,  for  the  powerful  body  of 
capitalist  manufacturers  were  against  any  interference, 
and  it  was  a  cardinal  policy  of  the  Whigs  themselves  that 
the  government  should  let  such  things  alone.  But  not 
only  were  people  now  coming  to  be  less  willing  to  dis- 
regard suffering  and  wrong,  but  there  was  more  feeling 
that  the  state  should  not  permit  things  which  were  harm- 
ful to  some  of  its  people.  Therefore  in  1833  a  law  was 
passed  which  for  the  textile  industry  prohibited  the 
employment  of  children  under  nine  years  of  age,  and 
limited  and  regulated  the  hours  for  older  children.  This 
was  the  first  instance  of  general  state  interference  in 
economic  conditions  since  the  Industrial  Revolution,  and 
while  it  accomplished  little  enough,  for  it  applied  only 
to  one  kind  of  labor  and  still  permitted  a  child  of  ten 
to  be  worked  sixty-nine  hours  a  week,  it  was  the  fore- 
runner of  many  other  laws,  and  the  real  beginning  of 
factory  legislation  in  Great  Britain. 

In  the  next  year  another  sweeping  reform  dealt  with  the 
problem  of  poor  relief.  In  days  of  old  and  in  the  Middle 
Ages  alms  were  given  to  the  needy  by  the  charitable  or  the 
religious.  After  the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries  in 
England  (1536-9),  much  of  this  kind  of  poor  relief  came 
to  an  end.  But  the  need  for  assistance  was  so  great 
that  shortly  after,  in  the  time  of  Henry  VIII  and  Eliza- 
beth, a  series  of  laws  had  been  passed  by  which  contribu- 


Factory 
legislation 


The  policy 
of  laissez- 
faire 


Reform 
of  poor 
relief,  1834 


170 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Reform 
of  town 
govemment, 
1835 


tions  for  the  needy  were  levied  upon  property-owners  in 
the  parishes  where  the  poor  were  to  be  supported.  The 
sick  and  the  aged  were  to  be  kept  in  poorhouses,  and  the 
able-bodied  idlers  put  to  work.  As  time  went  on  this 
legislation  had  been  badly  enforced.  Idlers  were  not 
compelled  to  work,  and  almshouses  for  the  needy  were  in- 
suflScient.  The  changes  of  the  Industrial  Revolution 
had  brought  great  hardship  to  many  who  could  not  adapt 
themselves  to  the  times,  and  there  seemed  to  be  greater 
need  for  assistance.  About  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century  began  the  practice  of  giving  money  allowances 
to  those  whose  wages  were  not  enough.  The  intention  was 
good,  but  employers  who  paid  as  low  wages  as  they  could, 
now  made  them  lower,  expecting  the  state  to  help,  while 
the  idle  and  the  shiftless,  feeling  sure  of  some  support, 
were  more  willing  than  before  to  be  paupers.  This  created 
an  intolerable  situation;  one  out  of  every  seven  persons  in 
Great  Britain  came  to  be  dependent  on  state  support,  and 
the  contributions  or  "poor  rates"  which  had  to  be  levied 
increased  in  amount  until  thrifty  people  moved  away  to 
avoid  having  to  pay  them.  Now  by  the  Poor  Law  of 
1834  the  organization  of  relief  was  improved,  and  the 
principle  was  adopted  of  not  supplementing  wages,  and  of 
assisting  people  outside  of  almshouses  only  with  medical 
aid. 

Next  year  the  system  of  town  government  was  re- 
formed. A  long  time  before  the  government  of  the  cities 
and  the  towns  had  been  established  by  charters.  In  most 
of  these  places  only  a  small  number  of  people  might  vote, 
the  franchise  being  confined  either  to  persons  descended 
from  those  originally  allowed  to  vote,  or  to  those  who 
owned  certain  property.  By  the  time  of  the  parliamentary 
reform  there  were  many  populous  places  with  a  few  voters 
each,  and  they  often  poor  and  lowly  men,  quite  dependent 
on  political  managers.  In  effect,  the  government  of  these 
places  was  often  in  the  hands  of  bodies  of  men  who  elected 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1832-1867    171 


themselves  to  offices  and  to  the  council.  Now  by  the 
Municipal  Corporations  Act  of  1835  most  of  the  boroughs 
and  cities  were  to  have  a  government  vested  in  a  council 
elected  by  the  taxpayers,  and  a  mayor  and  aldermen 
chosen  by  the  councillors  from  their  own  number. 

In  this  period  of  change  began  the  reign  of  Queen  Vic- 
toria, granddaughter  of  George  III,  and  daughter  of  his 
fourth  son,  the  Duke  of  Kent.  In  her  nineteenth  year 
she  was  awakened  early  one  morning,  in  June,  1837,  to 
meet  the  great  officials  who  came  to  say  that  she  was 
sovereign  of  Britain.  She  was  not  beautiful,  and  she 
was  entirely  without  the  dominating  and  brilliant  qualities 
of  an  Elizabeth  of  England  or  a  Catherine  of  Russia;  but 
she  was  a  sweet,  simple  girl,  who  had  been  well  brought 
up  by  her  mother;  and  afterward  her  personal  qualities 
as  a  woman  and  a  mother,  and  a  good,  if  not  a  forceful 
character,  were  to  endear  her  to  her  subjects  beyond  al- 
most any  other  sovereign  who  ever  ruled  England.  Her 
reign  of  sixty-four  years,  the  longest  in  the  annals  of  the 
country,  was  to  see  such  enormous  changes,  such  mighty 
extension  of  empire  and  power,  such  greatness  and  pros- 
perity, that  long  before  it  was  over  the  Victorian  Age 
would  seem  one  of  the  most  important  of  all  the  epochs 
in  the  history  of  England.  Victoria  was  to  take  little 
part  in  the  government  of  the  realm,  partly  because  the 
sovereign  was  no  longer  the  real  executive,  partly  because 
she  lacked  aptitude  and  ability  for  such  work.  In  1840 
she  married  Albert  of  Saxe-Coburg-Gotha,  who  thus  be- 
came the  Prince  Consort.  It  was  a  real  love  match,  and 
their  marriage  was  exceedingly  happy.  The  Prince  had 
an  excellent  influence  upon  his  wife,  and  because  of  his 
wisdom  and  ability  he  was  often  able  to  assist  the  minis- 
ters of  the  cabinet,  without  ever  intruding  his  advice  or 
assistance  upon  them. 

Reforms  and  improvements  continued  to  be  made.  Of 
large  importance  was  the  beginning  of  "penny  postage" 


Accession 
of  Queen 
Victoria 


The  Prince 
Consort 


Penny 
postage,  1840 


172 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Rowland 
HiU 


Continued 
discontetat 


in  1840,  which  did  more  to  revolutionize  communication 
between  persons  than  anything  else  in  the  nineteenth 
century.  Long  before,  a  system  of  post  had  been  de- 
veloped by  the  kings  for  sending  their  own  communica- 
tions, and  later  on  some  men  made  a  business  of  carrying 
letters  and  parcels.  In  the  seventeenth  century  a  monop- 
oly of  carrying  letters  in  England  was  granted  first  to 
private  individuals,  but  presently-  taken  over  by  the 
government  itself;  and  then  the  post  office  became  a 
department  of  the  central  government.  In  those  days  of 
poor  communications,  bad  roads,  and  comparatively  small 
business,  the  charges  varied  according  to  the  size  and 
weight  of  the  package  and  the  distance  it  was  to  be  car- 
ried. Generally  the  service  was  poor,  the  charges  high, 
and  letters  were  apt  to  be  opened  or  lost  on  the  way.  In 
1840,  following  the  work  of  Rowland  Hill,  it  was  decreed 
that  any  letter  not  more  than  half  an  ounce  in  weight 
having  on  it  an  adhesive  postage  stamp  costing  a  penny, 
might  be  sent  anywhere  in  the  United  Kingdom.  Op- 
ponents had  declared  the  scheme  to  be  impracticable,  and 
that  it  would  overwhelm  the  post  office  with  too  many 
letters.  Business  did  increase  enormously,  but  the 
officials  were  always  able  to  handle  it;  and  seldom  has 
anything  brought  greater  assistance  to  business  or  more 
happiness  and  consolation  to  people. 

But  the  tendency  of  the  times  was  such  that  discontent 
continued  to  increase.  There  were  many  bad  harvests,  a 
succession  of  them  in  the  early  years  of  Victoria's  reign, 
with  the  hunger  and  misery,  the  political  and  social  unrest 
always  attendant.  People  were  crowding  to  the  factories, 
in  a  movement  which  gradually  transferred  most  of  the 
population  from  the  farms  to  the  towns,  a  movement 
which  was  proceeding  too  rapidly,  and  resulted  now  in 
bringing  together  great  numbers  of  men  and  women  in 
competition  which  lowered  their  wages.  The  poor  law 
reform  was  an  excellent  thing,  but  scarcely  any  reform  of 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1832-1867    173 


an  evil  can  be  made  without  causing  some  temporary 
distress,  which  comes  not  from  the  reform  but  the  evil 
before  it.  The  old  poor  relief  had  indeed  pauperized  part 
of  the  people  and  encouraged  them  not  to  work;  but  now 
many  found  themselves  with  nothing  at  all  unless  they 
went  to  the  poorhouse.  Excellent  reforms  had  been  made, 
but  they  were  not  sufficient,  and  they  had  not  yet  had  time 
to  produce  such  betterment  as  they  would  later  on.  To 
many  people,  poor  and  discontented,  the  government 
seemed  selfish  and  corrupt,  the  queen  under  the  influence  of 
evil  ministers,  and  the  reforms  just  obtained  mostly  made 
for  the  upper  classes.  The  Reform  Law  of  1832  had  only 
extended  political  power  to  the  manufacturing  and  mid- 
dle classes,  and  given  nothing  to  most  of  the  people.  It 
was  in  these  years  that  Chartism  began. 

In  1836  was  founded  in  London  a  Workingman's  As- 
sociation to  better  the  conditions  of  the  employed.  The 
socialists  who  were  beginning  their  work  at  this  time 
did  not  believe  that  much  good  could  come  from  the 
existing  system  of  government,  but  the  Workingman's 
Association  immediately  began  to  strive  for  political 
reform.  In  1837  they  formulated  a  petition — which  was 
by  some  called  a  Charter,  after  which  they  were  known 
as  Chartists — which  contained  the  things  that  they  sought 
for.  They  demanded  that  property  qualifications  for 
members  of  parliament  should  be  abolished  and  that  the 
members  should  be  paid,  thus  making  it  possible  for 
representatives  of  the  people  to  be  chosen;  that  all  men 
should  be  allowed  to  vote,  and  that  the  voting  should  be 
by  ballot,  so  that  the  people  might  have  part  in  the  govern- 
ment over  them;  and  that  the  parliament  should  be  com- 
posed of  members  elected  each  year  from  equal  electoral 
districts.  These  things  had  been  demanded  in  England 
by  radical  reformers  for  many  years;  they  were  to  be 
sought  during  many  years  to  come;  and  as  times  changed 
most  of  them  would  no  longer  seem  to  be  dangerous.     By 


Misery 
among  the 
lower  class 


Chartism 


Demands 
of  the 
Chartists 


174 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Further 

industrial 

legislation 


The  Com 
Laws 


1918  Great  Britain  was,  in  effect,  to  have  all  these  things 
with  the  exception  of  annual  parliaments,  which  still 
seemed  unwise.  But  at  the  beginning  of  Victoria's  reign, 
when  there  was  yet  almost  no  democracy  in  Europe, 
the  idea  of  putting  the  government  into  the  control  of 
representatives  of  all  the  inhabitants  seemed  to  conserva- 
tive people  dangerous  and  absurd.  Moreover,  when  the 
movement  was  halted  by  obstacles  encountered,  it  got 
into  the  guidance  of  extremists  who  preached  violent  ac- 
tion. In  1839  a  great  convention  was  held,  from  which 
the  moderate  leaders  withdrew.  Riots  soon  broke  out, 
and  then  certain  small  insurrections.  The  government 
dealt  severely  with  the  leaders,  and  for  a  while  the  move- 
ment collapsed. 

This  was  partly  because  things  were  made  better.  In 
1842  appeared  the  famous  report  of  the  Parliamentary 
Commission  appointed  to  investigate  the  mines.  The 
result  was  a  law  which  forbade  women  to  work  in  the 
mines,  and  excluded  children  under  ten.  In  1844  a  law 
was  passed  which  limited  the  hours  of  employment  for 
factory  women  to  twelve  and  regulated  the  hours  of 
children.  Six  years  later  hours  for  women  and  children 
were  reduced  to  ten. 

Far  more  important  at  the  time  was  the  repeal  of  the 
Corn  (grain)  Laws.  These  laws  effected  a  tariff  for  the 
protection  of  the  agricultural  interests.  In  1815  a  law 
had  been  passed  to  prohibit  the  importation  of  wheat 
until  the  price  at  home  had  risen  to  a  certain  height.  This 
was  in  order  that  agriculture  might  not  be  crushed  out  by 
foreign  competition.  The  purpose  was  excellent,  but 
with  the  increasing  industrial  population  it  worked 
greatly  for  the  interests  of  landed  proprietors,  assuring 
them  high  prices  without  competition,  at  the  same  time 
that  it  imposed  on  the  industrial  population  a  grievous 
tax  of  high  prices.  Repeal  of  the  laws  had  often  been 
urged,  but  the  agricultural  interests  were  always  suflS- 


UNITED   KINGDOM,   1832-1867    175 


ciently  strong  in  parliament  to  prevent  anything  being 
done.  As  time  went  on,  reformers  who  desired  to  help 
the  poor,  and  the  manufacturing  interest  which  desired 
cheap  food  to  make  possible  lower  wages,  under  the  lead 
of  Richard  Cobden  and  John  Bright,  strongly  supported 
the  movement  and  the  agitation  became  greater  every 
year.  In  1841  a  general  election  went  against  the  move- 
ment, but  shortly  after  a  terrible  famine  began  in  Ireland, 
which  before  long  swept  away  a  considerable  part  of  the 
Irish  population.  During  the  awful  time  of  the  famine 
was  seen  the  spectacle  of  food  being  kept  out  by  a  tariff. 
Presently  Peel,  the  prime  minister,  became  a  convert; 
and  despite  furious  outcry  that  he  was  betraying  the 
Conservative  Party,  he  carried  through  the  repeal  of  the 
Corn  Laws.  Profound  changes  followed.  Cheap  food 
now  greatly  stimulated  industrial  development,  and  Great 
Britain  continued  to  be  the  most  marvellous  workshop 
in  the  world.  Much  distress  was  removed,  and  there 
was  a  greater  amount  of  material  prosperity  for  all  classes 
than  there  had  been  before.  Nevertheless,  English 
agriculture,  now  brought  into  competition  with  the  grain 
fields  of  America,  passed  partly  away.  As  time  went  on 
farming  was  largely  abandoned,  and  Britain  with  con- 
stantly increasing  population  became  ever  less  able  to  feed 
her  people.  The  island  was  a  vast  industrial  hive  and 
at  the  same  time  a  place  of  gentlemen's  estates  and  great 
parks.  When,  during  the  Great  War,  long  afterward,  the 
submarines  nearly  cut  England's  sea-routes  over  which  the 
imported  food  came,  for  a  moment  England  was  in  danger 
of  complete  destruction. 

In  1848  Chartism  appeared  for  the  last  time.  It  was 
the  year  of  revolutions,  in  Austria,  in  Italy,  in  France,  and 
in  Germany,  when  governments  were  falling  or  being 
threatened  with  destruction.  In  Britain  the  Chartists 
circulated  a  petition  upon  which  they  got  an  enormous 
number  of  signatures,  and  planned  a  procession  to  carry 


Repeal 
of  the 
Corn  Laws, 
1846 


Last  effort  of 
the  Chartists 


176 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Further 
parliamen- 
tary reform 


The  Reform 
Law  of  1867 


the  petition  to  parliament.  The  government  made 
elaborate  arrangements  to  prevent  insurrection  or  out- 
break, the  middle  class  rallied  to  its  support,  and  a  great 
number  of  special  constables  were  sworn  in  to  help  to 
keep  order.  The  petition  was  presented  to  parliament, 
but  the  affair  ended  in  ridicule  and  contempt. 

Chartism  failed,  but  the  progress  of  amendment  con- 
tinued. The  next  great  step  was  taken  in  1867  when  the 
second  great  Parliamentary  Reform  Law  was  passed. 
Ever  since  1832  there  had  been  demand  for  extension  of 
the  franchise  and  a  new  arrangement  of  electoral  dis- 
tricts. Again  population  had  stood  still  or  diminished 
in  some  places  and  grown  amazingly  in  others;  small 
boroughs  returned  as  many  members  as  great  new  in- 
dustrial cities;  while  out  of  all  the  men  of  voting  age 
only  one  in  six  had  the  franchise.  The  demands  for 
further  reform,  which  had  slowly  been  gathering  force, 
became  stronger  by  1865,  when  the  American  Civil  War 
ended  with  the  triumph  of  the  North,  and  the  feeling  that 
democracy  had  gained  dignity  and  strength.  Accordingly, 
in  1866  the  Liberals  introduced  a  reform  bill,  which  would 
have  added  400,000  voters  to  the  existing  electorate;  but 
this  was  defeated,  and  the  Conservatives  soon  came  into 
power. 

But  now  suddenly  there  was  a  great  awakening  of  the 
workingmen  and  disfranchised,  and  some  violence  which 
made  a  profound  impression.  At  this  point  Disraeli,  the 
brilliant  and  versatile  leader  of  the  Conservatives  in 
the  House  of  Commons,  concluding  that  extension  of  the 
franchise  was  inevitable,  resolved  that  it  should  be  the 
work  of  his  party,  even  though  they  had  just  come  into 
power  opposed  to  such  a  measure.  Once  beginning,  he 
soon  went  farther  than  the  Liberals  themselves,  and  the 
result  was  a  veritable  revolution  in  the  government  of 
Great  Britain.  It  is  true  that  all  men  were  not  en- 
franchised, and  the  famous  proposal  of  John  Stuart  Mill 


UNITED   KINGDOM,    1832-1867    177 


that  women  be  allowed  to  vote  was  ignored  and  almost 
forgotten  until  many  years  later;  but  the  Parliamentary 
Reform  Act  of  1867  not  only  made  a  new  and  better 
distribution  of  representation,  but  the  franchise,  far  more 
widely  extended  than  in  1832,  was  granted  to  part  of  the 
lower  class,  especially  the  artisans  of  the  towns.  Al- 
together, 1,000,000  new  voters  were  added,  so  that  the 
franchise  was  now  possessed  by  2,500,000  people,  or  one 
out  of  every  twelve  of  the  entire  population.  This  was  the 
greatest  step  toward  democracy  that  had  ever  been 
taken  in  Britain  or  in  Europe.  That  same  year  the 
constitution  of  the  North  German  Confederation,  which 
later  became  the  basis  of  the  constitution  of  the  German 
Empire,  provided  for  an  assembly,  the  Reichstag,  to  be 
elected  by  universal  manhood  suffrage.  But  it  was  after- 
wards seen  that  the  Reichstag  had  little  real  power,  while 
the  government  of  the  United  Kingdom  was  now  almost 
entirely  controlled  by  the  House  of  Commons. 

Meanwhile  momentous  changes  were  begun  in  the 
character  and  organization  of  the  British  Empire.  For 
the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  world,  self-government 
and  equal  privileges  were  extended  to  outlying  and  sub- 
ordinate dominions  over  the  sea.  Previously  colonies 
had  been  allowed  to  drift  away  when  they  pleased,  as  was 
often  the  case  with  the  Greeks,  or  else  kept  in  strict  sub- 
ordination for  the  benefit  of  the  country  which  ruled  them. 
It  was  the  glory  of  Great  Britain  in  the  nineteenth  century 
to  begin  the  reorganization  of  her  empire  into  a  common- 
wealth of  self-governing  communities  with  such  privileges 
as  they  cared  to  have,  and  united  with  her  at  last  only 
by  common  interests  and  affection. 

Just  before  the  French  Revolution  Britain's  possessions 
on  the  mainland  of  North  America  were  almost  all  lost. 
A  third  of  the  English-speaking  people  separated  from  the 
home  land,  and  it  almost  seemed  that  the  end  of  her 
imperial  greatness  had  come.     It  also  seemed  to  the  peo- 


Wide 

extension  of 
franchise 


The  British 
Empire 


Beginnings 
of  the 
Empire 


178 


EUROPE.   1789-1920 


Canada 


Lord 

Durham's 

mission 


pie  of  Britain  in  those  days  that  the  lost  colonies  had  been 
ungrateful,  unwilling  to  bear  their  just  share  of  the  bur- 
dens of  the  empire,  and  eager  to  depart  as  soon  as  they 
could.  Far  from  taking  to  heart,  therefore,  the  lesson 
which  some  proclaimed — that  the  American  colonists 
might  have  been  held  in  loyal  connection  if  what  they 
considered  their  rights  as  English  freemen  had  not  been 
infringed — people  in  their  bitterness  believed  that  colonies 
would  in  any  event  try  to  break  away,  and  that  mean- 
while they  should  be  ruled  for  the  benefit  of  the  colonizing 
power. 

After  the  establishment  of  the  United  States,  Canada, 
which  had  been  held  in  spite  of  the  American  Revolution- 
ary War,  remained  Britain's  largest  possession  peopled  by 
Europeans.  In  1791  a  constitution  had  been  granted 
and  the  country  divided  into  Upper  Canada,  later  On- 
tario, containing  English-speaking  colonists,  and  Lower 
Canada,  or  Quebec,  with  French  people.  In  each  province 
the  government  was  actually  in  the  hands  of  officials  not 
responsible  to  the  people,  who  managed  affairs  as  they 
pleased.  In  the  French  portion  discontent  became  so 
great  that  in  1832  the  legislature  refused  to  appropriate 
money,  and  continued  this  refusal  for  five  years,  until  a 
rebelHon  broke  out  under  a  certain  Joseph  Papineau. 
The  disaffection  spread  to  Upper  Canada,  where  the 
discontented  felt  that  the  government  was  very  different 
from  that  in  the  American  commonwealths  south  of  the 
Lakes.  Actually  the  rebellion  of  1837  was  easily  put 
down,  but  a  crisis  had  arisen  much  like  that  in  Massa- 
chusetts in  1775. 

This  was  a  turning-point  in  the  history  of  the  British 
Empire.  In  1838  the  Liberals  sent  out  as  High  Com- 
missioner Lord  Durham,  a  man  of  advanced  ideas  and 
great  energy  and  courage;  and  full  power  was  given  him  to 
deal  with  the  situation.  His  high-handed,  energetic 
measures  aroused  much  opposition  and  presently  brought 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1832-1867    179 


about  his  recall.  But  in  the  following  year  he  delivered 
his  famous  Report.  He  did  not  believe  that  self-govern- 
ment would  cause  the  inhabitants  to  wish  to  abandon 
connection  with  Great  Britain.  Rather  the  tie  would 
become  "more  durable  and  advantageous,  by  having  more 
of  equality,  of  freedom,  and  of  local  independence."  And 
he  added,  with  much  nobility,  that  if  in  the  future  Canada 
was  not  to  be  part  of  the  British  Empire,  none  the  less  it 
was  Britain's  first  duty  to  secure  the  well  being  of  the 
Canadian  people.  He  advised  that,  except  for  relations 
between  Canada  and  the  mother  country  and  foreign  af- 
fairs, matters  affecting  the  colonists  should  be  left  alto- 
gether to  themselves.  With  the  exception  of  the  governor 
and  his  secretary,  all  the  officials  should  be  responsible 
to  an  elected  legislature.  His  suggestions  were  embodied 
in  the  Canada  Government  Act  of  1840. 

The  Canadians  now  settled  down  in  content,  and  began 
working  out  the  destiny  before  them.  In  1867  the  British 
North  American  Act  united  the  two  Canadas  together 
with  New  Brunswick  and  Nova  Scotia  into  the  Dominion 
of  Canada,  to  which  in  after  years  were  added  all  the 
territories  in  the  northern  part  of  the  continent,  with  the 
exception  of  Newfoundland,  which  still  remains  a  separate 
commonwealth,  and  Alaska.  The  government  of  this 
federation  was  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  people,  except 
that  the  nominal  executive,  the  Governor  General,  was 
appointed  from  London;  but  he  had  in  Canada  much  the 
same  position  as  that  of  the  king  in  England.  In  course 
of  time,  as  Canada  increased  in  population  and  resources, 
the  tie  between  the  Dominion  and  the  United  Kingdom 
was  little  more  than  the  security  which  the  mother  country 
gave  to  the  colony  and  the  loyalty  and  affection  which 
the  colonists  felt  for  the  old  land.  But  the  policy  of  Lord 
Durham  was  seen  to  be  abundantly  justified,  for  despite 
the  fact  that  commercial  and  economic  forces  seemed  to 
draw  the  Dominion  ever  closer  to  the  United  States,  with 


His 
advice 


Success  of 
the  new 
policy 


Loyalty 

and 

affection 


180 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Failure 

with 

Ireland 


Originof  the 

Irish 

Question 


Conquest 
of  Ireland 


the  possibility  that  at  last  the  two  would  be  joined  to- 
gether, yet  in  1912  the  Canadians  rejected  a  reciprocity 
treaty  which  might  have  begun  this;  and  during  the 
Great  War  against  Germany  the  Canadian  people  showed 
their  love  for  the  Empire  by  sacrifices  and  magnificent 
efforts  when  the  government  at  London  never  could  have 
compelled  them.  Furthermore,  the  system  established  in 
Canada  was  later  on  to  be  worked  out  in  Australia,  in 
New  Zealand,  in  South  Africa,  and  elsewhere,  the  parts 
mostly  inhabited  by  white  people,  until  at  last  an  English- 
man could  boast  that  the  Empire  was  a  "living  home  of 
divine  freedom"  in  which  the  ends  of  the  earth  were  united 
**in  the  name  and  the  hope  of  self-government." 

In  the  midst  of  this  success  there  was  one  great  failure. 
Close  beside  England  lies  Ireland.  Since  1800  it  had 
been  part  of  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland,  but  it  had  usually  had  the  position  of  a  colony 
or  subordinate  possession.  Ireland  had  for  a  long  time 
been  the  most  perplexing  problem  in  British  adminstration, 
and  in  the  nineteenth  century  it  was  more  and  more 
evident  that  here  England  had  not  succeeded. 

From  long  before,  Ireland  had  been  possessed  by  a 
branch  of  the  Celtic  race,  the  people  who  continued  to 
live  also  in  the  Scottish  Highlands  and  in  Wales.  A  fine 
culture  and  literature  had  arisen  among  the  Irish,  but 
the  country  remained  divided  among  warring  tribes  who 
failed  to  unite  and  make  an  Irish  nation.  Accordingly 
they  failed  to  prevent  Normans  and  Englishmen  from 
conquering  the  east  coast,  establishing  themselves  in 
Dublin,  and  harassing  the  rest  of  the  country  all  through 
the  Middle  Ages.  Had  Irishmen  been  able  to  free  their 
country  they  might  have  become  a  prosperous,  united 
nation.  But  they  could  not  do  this,  nor  could  England 
make  her  domination  complete  until  almost  too  late.  The 
conquest  was  effected  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth 
centuries,   during   the   Reformation   and   the   period   of 


'-^\ 


K) 


rr* 


k 


Ik 


.1! 


UNITED   KINGDOM,   1832-1867    181 


colonial  expansion.  After  several  vain  rebellions  the 
Catholic  Irish  were  completely  subdued.  From  part 
of  the  northeast  country  the  Celtic  Catholics  were  largely 
driven  out,  and  Protestants  brought  over  to  make  the 
Plantation  of  Ulster.  In  the  rest  of  the  island  most  of 
the  Catholics  were  deprived  of  their  land,  they  were  left 
with  no  means  of  livelihood  but  working  on  the  estates 
of  the  conquerors,  forbidden  to  enter  the  learned  pro- 
fessions, forbidden  to  worship  under  their  own  priests, 
taxed  to  support  the  Church  of  England,  and  practically 
reduced  to  serfdom.  They  were  treated  immeasurably 
worse  than  the  American  colonists  ever  were,  and  had 
they  been  far  away  from  England  they  would  undoubtedly 
have  risked  all  to  get  their  freedom.  But  they  were  close 
at  hand,  and  resistance  was  hopeless.  Therefore  the  eight- 
eenth century  was  passed  in  despair,  with  all  the  best 
young  men  leaving  the  country.  It  can  only  be  said  that 
these  things  were  done  in  an  age  of  religious  discrimination 
or  persecution,  when  everywhere  conquerors  imposed 
harsh  will  on  the  conquered,  and  that  most  Englishmen 
then  were  in  inferior  and  lowly  position,  and  had  no  con- 
trol over  their  government  and  little  knowledge  of  the 
condition  of  the  Irish. 

During  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  Ire. 
land  had  been  entirely  subordinate  to  the  government 
of  England.  During  the  period  1782-1800  she  was 
allowed  to  have  an  independent  parliament;  but  not- 
withstanding some  prosperity,  there  was  such  confusion 
finally  in  Ireland  and  such  danger  during  the  struggle  with 
Napoleon,  that  in  1800  an  Act  of  Union  was  passed  joining 
Ireland  with  Great  Britain.  Wales  had  long  been  united 
with  England,  and  Scotland  had  joined  in  an  Act  of  Union 
passed  in  1707.  In  both  instances  the  union  had  been  of 
great  advantage  to  all.  But  in  the  case  of  Ireland  there 
were  obstacles  which  would  have  to  be  removed  before 
any  union   could  be  a  success,   and   unfortunately  the 


Subjection 
and  despair 


Union  with 

Great 

Britain 


182 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Continued 
misery  and 
unrest 


Some  Irish- 
men desire 
separation 


India 


defects  were  not  for  some  time  amended.  The  Catholics 
had  expected  to  see  the  discriminations  against  them 
removed,  but  this  was  not  done  until  1829.  The  land 
had  once  been  taken  away  from  the  Irish  proprietors,  and 
the  Irish  population,  constantly  increasing,  lived  on  little 
patches  of  ground  rented  at  high  price,  even  in  best  years 
scarcely  suflScient  for  support. 

During  the  years  when  in  Great  Britain  evil  conditions 
were  being  slowly  removed  by  the  enlightened  legislation 
of  reformers,  the  Irish  people  continued  to  live  on  in  ignor- 
ance, misery,  hunger,  and  filth.  The  climax  of  their 
sufferings  came  1846-9.  The  main  support  of  the  peas- 
ants, their  potato  crop,  failed,  and  there  was  a  terrible 
famine,  followed  by  a  plague.  These  frightful  years 
left  an  abiding  mark  upon  Ireland.  The  best  of  the  peo- 
ple left  the  stricken  land,  coming  to  America  in  a  great 
migration.  For  a  long  time  this  continued.  During  the 
nineteenth  century  the  population  of  England  rose  from 
8,500,000  to  32,000,000,  but  that  of  Ireland,  which  in- 
creased from  less  than  5,000,000  to  more  than  8,000,000 
by  1846,  declined  during  the  remainder  of  the  century  to 
about  4,000,000.  During  this  time  most  of  the  Irish 
were  discontented,  and  the  country  could  only  be  ruled 
imder  coercion  acts  and  by  force,  while  there  was  a  great 
deal  of  lawlessness  and  brutal  crime.  Many  Irishmen 
wished  to  separate  completely  from  Britain,  and  about 
1865  the  Fenians,  a  revolutionary  organization,  tried  to 
bring  this  about  by  creating  a  reign  of  terror.  It  was  not 
until  the  later  years  of  the  nineteenth  century  that  a  series 
of  great  and  liberal  reforms  for  a  time  brought  quietness 
and  better  conditions. 

Britain  did  not  attempt  to  extend  self-government  to 
possessions  not  peopled  by  white  men.  Of  these  the  most 
important  was  India,  which  during  the  eighteenth  century 
had  been  won  for  the  English  East  India  Company  by  a 
succession  of  great  captains  and  merchants.     Under  this 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1832-1867    183 


commercial  organization  a  huge  Indian  empire  was 
gradually  acquired,  and  ruled  in  such  manner  that  the 
natives  were  in  some  ways  better  off  than  ever  before,  but 
entirely  subject  to  Englishmen  and  Scotchmen,  who 
amassed  great  fortunes  among  them.  India,  while  ruled 
by  the  Company,  was  yet  indirectly  controlled  by  the 
British  government,  which  regarded  her  as  the  greatest 
possession  in  the  empire,  and  one  of  the  foundations  of 
the  empire's  commercial  importance. 

Suddenly  in  1857  a  terrible  mutiny  broke  out  among  the 
Sepoys,  or  native  troops,  who  made  the  largest  part  of  the 
Company's  army.  The  causes  were  many — reforms  which 
had  recently  been  made,  hatred  of  the  aliens  who  ruled 
India,  belief  that  religious  prejudices  were  being  violated 
by  the  British.  There  were  terrible  massacres  at  Cawn- 
pore  and  other  places,  for  which  the  English  afterward 
took  sternest  vengeance.  The  few  English  soldiers  in 
India  were  able  to  do  little  at  first,  but  they  behaved  with 
great  bravery,  and,  soon  reinforced,  they  crushed  the 
mutiny  completely.  The  principal  results  were  that 
English  domination  was  more  firmly  established  than 
before,  and  that  in  1858  the  powers  of  the  East  India 
Company  were  transferred  to  the  British  government, 
which  now  added  directly  to  its  dominions  800,000  square 
miles  of  land  and  200,000,000  people. 

Generally  speaking,  during  this  period  Britain  sought 
to  be  aloof  from  European  affairs,  taking  little  part  in 
them,  but  meanwhile  developing  her  commerce,  her  in- 
dustry, and  her  empire.  She  had  a  small  army,  and 
wished  to  avoid  being  drawn  into  great  wars.  She  was 
moreover  paying  off  part  of  her  gigantic  national  debt.  Her 
navy  was  by  far  the  greatest  in  the  world,  and  after  Tra- 
falgar her  command  of  the  seas  was  at  no  time  disputed. 

With  the  United  States  relations  slowly  improved. 
During  the  struggle  with  Napoleon,  the  Americans  had 
objected  to  the  measures  by  which  Britain  enforced  hejc 


The  Indian 
Mutiny 


Foreign 
relations 


Relations 
with  the 
United 
States 


184 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  British 
and  the 
American 
peoples 


blockade,  giving  less  consideration  to  the  difficulties  of 
England  than  they  were  disposed  to  give  a  hundred  years 
later  when  Britain  was  trying  to  blockade  the  German 
Empire.  There  were  causes  for  exasperation  on  both 
sides,  though,  it  was  afterward  agreed,  no  real  cause  for 
war.  In  the  contest,  which  Americans  called  the  War  of 
1812,  in  which  England  used  a  little  of  her  strength,  while 
most  of  her  resources  were  being  employed  against  France, 
neither  party  won  triumph.  In  the  treaty  of  Ghent 
(1814),  which  concluded  the  contest,  Britain  did  not 
renounce  the  right  of  search,  which  had  aroused  so  much 
American  opposition.  Seen  in  larger  perspective  since 
then  this  war  is  a  landmark  in  the  history  of  the  English- 
speaking  peoples,  for  it  was  the  last  struggle  between  the 
two  great  branches.  Later  on  there  were  often  disputes 
between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  but  always 
they  were  settled  by  diplomatic  negotiation  and  agree- 
ment, until  at  the  end  of  a  hundred  years  it  was  found  that 
most  people  in  the  two  countries  regarded  the  idea  of  war 
between  the  two  as  utterly  criminal  and  absurd,  and  not 
to  be  thought  of. 

The  relations  between  the  governments  improved 
sooner  than  those  between  the  people  themselves.  The 
Americans  were  a  new  nation,  proud  and  sensitive,  con- 
vinced of  superiority  to  any  other  people,  yet  sensitive 
about  their  crudeness  and  defects.  Englishmen,  with 
more  narrowness  of  spirit  and  insular  pride  then  than 
now,  looked  down  upon  them  as  rough  settlers  in  a  distant 
land;  and  travelers,  such  as  Charles  Dickens,  wrote  about 
them  with  a  contempt  which  was  bitterly  resented.  More- 
over, there  were  the  memories  of  the  Revolutionary  period : 
the  British  recalled  that  the  colonists  had  broken  away; 
the  Americans  believed  they  had  been  abused  by  a  tyrant, 
and  had  escaped  from  subjection  to  become  freemen. 
Most  important,  perhaps,  was  the  fact  that  for  a  long  time 
Americans  advanced  more  rapidly  to  democratic  control 


I 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1832-1867    185 


of  their  government  than  the  British.  Down  to  1867  the 
government  of  the  United  Kingdom  was  still  controlled 
by  the  upper  and  middle  classes,  and  there  was  always  an 
aristocratic  character  about  it.  The  American  Civil  War 
(1861-5)  marked  an  epoch.  During  that  contest  the 
British  government  would  have  been  pleased  to  recog- 
nize the  Southern  Confederacy,  and  hoped  that  the 
Southern  slave-holders  and  aristocrats  would  triumph. 
On  the  other  hand,  great  numbers  of  the  plain  people  in 
England,  most  of  them  not  yet  enfranchised,  admired 
Lincoln,  hoped  that  he  would  be  able  to  abolish  slavery, 
and  believed  that  in  the  end  the  North  would  triumph. 
They  continued  to  maintain  this  attitude,  with  magnifi- 
cent patience,  though  some  of  them,  the  Lancashire 
weavers,  nearly  starved  when  the  Northern  blockade  cut 
off  the  export  of  cotton  from  the  South.  In  1865  the 
North  was  completely  victorious.  Two  years  later  a  great 
extension  of  the  franchise  made  Britain  far  more  demo- 
cratic than  ever  before;  and  in  the  following  years  with  the 
continued  extension  of  democracy,  the  foundation  was 
laid  for  real  fellowship  between  these  parts  of  the  English- 
speaking  people.  On  both  sides  of  the  water  some 
continued  to  oppose  better  understanding,  especially 
Irish-Americans  in  the  United  States,  but  after  the 
Spanish-American  War  (1898),  in  which  Britain  showed 
unmistakable  friendship  for  the  American  people,  good  ac- 
cord rapidly  developed.  Then  at  last  came  the  Great  War 
to  complete  the  work.  In  the  dread  hour  when  England 
seemed  in  mortal  danger  with  all  that  England  represented, 
most  ot  the  American  people  realized  as  never  before  how 
much  the  two  nations  stood  for  the  same  civilization  and 
ideals,  and  this  realization  was  one  of  the  important  fac- 
tors in  bringing  America  to  the  aid  of  the  Allies. 

With  Continental  peoples  the  relations  of  England  were 
generally  good.  There  was  some  rivalry  with  France  over 
colonial  projects  and  position  in  the  Mediterranean.     The 


The  two 

democracies 

friendly 


Relations 
with 

European 
powers 


186  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

establishment  of  the  Italian  nation  was  watched  with 
sympathy  as  was  the  progress  of  the  Germanies  toward 
union.  Englishmen  had  helped  the  Greeks  to  get  in- 
dependence; but  they  maintained  their  friendship  with 
Turkey.  Often  during  this  period  there  was  fear  that 
Russia,  expanding  steadily  through  Asia,  might  strike 
south  against  India,  and  also  that  she  might  destroy  the 
Sultan's  power  and  take  Constantinople  for  herself.  In 
1853  a  dispute  arose  between  France  and  Russia  and 
between  Russia  and  Turkey.  Into  this  dispute  England 
was  drawn,  though  the  government  was  most  anxious 
not  to  go  to  war.  None  the  less,  when  Russian  troops 
attacked  Turkey  there  was  great  popular  feeling  in  Eng- 
Xhe  land,  and  with  a  light  heart  the  country  went  quickly  into 

Crimean  the  contest  unprepared.     In  the  earlier  part  of  the  war  the 

^"  British  fleet  failed  to  accomplish  what  had  been  expected 

of  it  in  the  Baltic,  but  an  English  and  French  army,  after 
a  siege  in  which  there  was  horrible  privation  and  suffer- 
ing, captured  the  fortress  of  Sevastopol  in  the  Crimea. 
In  1856  the  Crimean  War  came  to  an  end  with  the  Treaty 
of  Paris,  which  guaranteed  the  independence  and  integrity 
of  Turkey . 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General  accounts:  in  addition  to  the  works  previously  cited, 
The  Political  History  of  England,  volume  XII;  1837  to  1901, 
^  by  Sidney  Low  and  L.  C.  Sanders  (1907). 

Biographies:  Sir  Sidney  Lee,  Queen  Victoria:  a  Biography 
(1903);  The  Letters  of  Queen  Vidoriay  edited  by  A.  C.  Benson 
and  Viscount  Esher,  3  vols.  (1907),  for  the  period  fe37-61; 
Sir  T.  Martin,  Life  of  His  Royal  Highness  the  Prince  Consort, 
5  vols.  (1875-80);  G.  M.  Trevelyan,  The  Life  of  John  Bright 
(1913);  John  Morley,  Life  of  Richard  Cobden  (1881);  W.  F. 
Monypenny,  The  Life  of  Benjamin  Disraeli,  Earl  of  Beaconsfieldy 
2  vols.  (1910-12),  continued  by  G.  E.  Buckle,  4  vols.  (1914- 
20) ;  the  Earl  of  Rosebery,  Sir  Robert  Peel  (1899). 

Local   government:    Sidney    and   Beatrice   Webb,    English 


UNITED  KINGDOM,   1832-1867    187 

Local  Government,  1688-1835,  3  vols.  (1906) ;  Sir  George  NichoUs 
A  History  of  the  English  Poor  Law,  2  vols.  (ed.  1898),  to  1834, 
continued  in  a  third  volume  by  Thomas  Mackay  (1904),  carry* 
ing  the  subject  down  to  1899. 

Social  reform:  H.  de  B.  Gibbins,  English  Social  Reformers 
(1902) ;  Edwin  Hodder,  Life  and  Work  of  the  7th  Earl  of  Shaftes- 
bury, 3  vols.  (1888). 

The  Corn  Laws:  J.  S.  Nicholson,  The  History  of  the  English 
Corn  Laws  (1904);  B.  H.  Holland,  The  Fall  of  Protection,  ISJ^O- 
1850  (1913),  best  for  the  free-trade  movement  in  England. 

Industry  and  commerce :  Leone  Levi,  History  of  British  Com- 
merce and  of  the  Economic  Progress  of  the  British  Nation,  1763- 
1870  (1872);  G.  H.  Perns,  The  Industrial  History  of  Modem 
England    (1914). 

Chartism:  Friedrich  Engels,  The  Condition  of  the  Working 
Class  in  England  in  184-^  (ed.  1892);  Thomas  Carlyle,  Chartism 
(1839);  Edouard  DoUeans,  Le  Chartisme,  2  vols.  (1912-13); 
R.  G.  Gammage,  History  of  Chartism  (1854,  new  ed.  1894), 
the  author  was  a  leader  in  the  movement;  Mark  Ho  veil,  The 
Chartist  Movement  (1918),  the  best  account. 

Canada  and  Greater  Britain:  Sir  J.  G.  Bourinot,  Canada 
under  British  Rule,  1760-1900  (1900);  William  Kingsford, 
History  of  Canada,  10  vols.  (1887-97),  the  fullest  account,  to 
1841;  S.  J.  Reid,  Life  and  Letters  of  the  First  Earl  of  Durham, 
2  vols.  (1906);  Lord  Durham's  Report  on  the  Affairs  of  British 
North  America,  edited  by  Sir  C.  P.  Lucas,  3  vols.  (1912); 
Selected  Speeches  and  Documents  on  British  Colonial  Policy, 
1763-1917,  edited  by  A.  B.  Keith,  2  vols.  (1918). 

The  British  Empire  and  the  United  States:  G.  L.  Beer,  The 
English-Speaking  Peoples,  Their  Future  Relations  and  Joint 
International  Obligations  (1917). 


CHAPTER  IX 
FRANCE   BEFORE   1870 

Quand  je  considere  cette  nation  en  elle-meme,  je  la  trouve  plus  ex- 
traordinaire qu  'aucun  des  evenements  de  son  histoire  ...  la 
plus  brillante  et  la  plus  dangereuse  des  nations  de  I'Europe,  et  la 
mieux  faite  pour  y  devenir  tour  a  tour  un  objet  d'admiration,  de 
haine,  de  pitie,  de  terreur,  mais  jamais  d'indifT6rence. 

Alexis  de  Tocqueville,  L'Ancien  RSgime  et  la  Revolution 

(1856),  Chapter  XX. 

France  The  position  of  France  in  1815  was  in  some  respects 

after  like  that  of  Germany  in  1918.     After  long  and  exhausting 

Napoleon  I  ^^j,g  France  had  been  overwhelmed,  and  the  memories 
of  the  struggle  had  left  much  bitterness  and  fear.  Some 
believed  the  French  people  should  be  placed  under  such 
restraint  that  it  would  be  out  of  their  power  to  make  an- 
other aggression  upon  Europe,  that  they  should  be  forced 
to  make  good  the  damage  they  had  done,  and  surrender 
provinces  which  would  leave  them  weak  for  the  future. 
But  apparently  there  was  then  less  belief  that  outrages, 
atrocities,  and  violations  of  the  law  of  war  had  been  com- 
mitted. Moreover,  it  was  widely  felt  that  a  considerable 
section  of  the  French  people  had  not  supported  Napoleon, 
and  that  at  worst  they  had  been  misled  and  compelled  to 
obey  him.  There  were  French  exiles  who  had  always 
sought  help  from  the  Allies  to  return  and  restore  whatever 
could  be  reestablished,  and  after  the  abdication  of  Na- 
poleon, the  Bourbon  heir  was  brought  back  and  put  upon 
the  throne  as  Louis  XVIII  (1814-1824).  So,  there  was 
much  disposition  to  deal  with  France  mildly,  and  even 

188 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


189 


after  the  Hundred  Days  of  the  Waterloo  campaign, 
though  a  heavy  indemnity  was  imposed  and  some  territory 
taken  away,  yet  lenient  terms  were  still  granted.  / 

The  Congress  of  Vienna,  which  disposed  things  after 
Napoleon's  fall,  proceeded  to  put  an  end  to  his  arrange- 
ments. The  incomparable  skill  of  Talleyrand,  the  French 
representative,  was  able  to  effect  much  in  reestablishing 
his  country's  position;  nevertheless,  what  Frenchmen  had 
been  doing  in  Europ>e  for  a  score  of  years  was  now  largely 
undone,  and  the  settlement  of  Vienna  was  made  by  the 
conquerors  of  France.  To  a  proud,  warlike,  high-spirited 
people  like  the  French,  who  had  just  passed  through  such 
wonderful  experiences  and  glory,  this  was  an  intolerable 
situation,  and  they  would  long  chafe  at  that  which  the  Allies 
had  decreed;  and  for  a  long  while  the  other  powers  would 
continue  on  guard  against  them.  Hence  for  many  years 
it  would  be  diflScult  for  any  French  government,  which 
desired  to  keep  peace  and  restore  the  prosperity  of  the  coun- 
try, to  adopt  such  a  foreign  policy  as  would  please  foreign 
powers  and  yet  please  the  people  of  France;  while  on  more 
than  one  occasion  weak  or  unscrupulous  leaders  would  find 
it  easy  to  divert  attention  from  troublesome  domestic 
questions  by  engaging  in  war  or  bold  policy  abroad. 

Moreover  it  was  a  long  time  before  the  government  of 
France  could  be  settled  on  a  solid  foundation.  In  1789 
the  intellectuals  and  the  middle  classes  of  France,  knowing 
that  the  country  was  bankrupt  and  that  the  government 
was  slowly  breaking  down,  and  looking  with  disfavor  upon 
the  oppressive  remains  of  the  feudal  system  in  France,  had 
been  able  to  abolish  serfdom  and  feudal  privileges,  secure 
equality  in  matters  of  justice  and  taxation,  and  make  the 
government  a  limited  monarchy.  This  was  as  far  as  the 
great  mass  of  the  people  cared  to  go.  Most  Frenchmen 
strongly  desired  that  a  king  should  continue  to  rule  them. 
In  July  1789,  almost  accidentally  the  Revolution  entered 
upon   a   more   radical   phase,   and  all  sorts   of  changes 


The  settle- 
ment of 
Vienna 


The  work 
of  the 
Revolution 
unfinished 


The  radicals 
in  the 
French 
Revolution 


190 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Reaction 


In  France 
the  work 
of  1789 
carried 
forward 
in  1830 


followed  in  swift  succession, J  It  was  not  long  before  the 
Church,  which  in  spite  of  its  faults  was  still  dear  to  a  great 
many  people,  was  attacked  and  its  property  taken.  The 
king  was  deprived  of  his  power,  presently  he  was  put  to 
death,  and  a  republic  established.  These  changes  were 
wrought  by  a  well-organized  body  of  bold,  able  rad- 
icals, who  were  only  a  small  part  of  the  population,  and 
who  soon  had  to  maintain  themselves  by  military  despotism 
and  a  reign  of  terror.  (  Shortly  after  there  was  so  much 
confusion  and  discontent,  that  presently  what  the  people 
most  wanted  was  the  strong  rule  of  some  capable  man, 
and  Napoleon  Bonaparte  easily  ^ot  supreme  power  ten 
years  after  the  Revolution  began.  He  did  not  become 
king,  but  as  First  Consul  and  emperor  he  wielded  far 
greater  power  than  Louis  XVI  ever  had.^  Very  wisely 
he  restored  as  much  of  the  old  system  of  government  and 
religion  as  the  people  desired;  and  yet  he  maintained  the 
great  reforms  of  the  beginning  of  the  Revolution  and 
the  best  work  of  the  Convention,  which  had  the  sanction 
of  the  majority  of  the  population.  ^ 

In  1814  the  Allies  brought  back  to  Paris  the  younger 
brother  of  Louis  XVI,  and  put  him  on  the  throne.  Louis 
XVIII  was  not  popular,  and  for  a  short  time  Napoleon 
easily  dispossessed  him;  but  supported  as  he  was  by  the 
Allies,  the  people  of  France  were  willing  to  accept  him, 
provided  he  did  not  try  to  undo  the  Revolutionary 
changes  which  the  people  appro v^ J  He  was  sagacious 
enough  to  understand  thi&;  /but  he  was  accompanied  by 
supporters,  who,  as  a  contemporary  said,  had  learned 
nothing  and  forgotten  nothing.  They  wanted  venge- 
ance, and  restoration  of  nobles  and  Church  to  the  privileges 
and  the  position  which  had  formerly  been  theirs.  In  a 
little  while  their  policy  prevailed;  then  they  were  over- 
thrown; and  the  work  of  the  French  Revolution  was 
continued  by  the  Revolution  of  1830;  after  which  other 
revolution  and  reaction  followed.    \ 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


191 


When  Louis  XVIII  came  to  the  throne  he  assumed  The  Charter 
that  he  held  his  title  by  divine  right,  but  he  granted  to 
the  French  people  a  Charter.  According  to  this  Charter, 
the  government  was  to  be  carried  on  by  the  king;  but 
there  was  also  to  be  a  legislative  assembly,  consisting  of 
two  chambers,  one  composed  of  peers,  hereditary  or 
named  for  life  by  the  crown,  the  other  chosen  by  a  small 
number  of  the  people,  the  franchise  being  restricted  to 
men,  thirty  years  of  age,  who  paid  300  francs  a  year  in 
direct  taxes,  while  only  those  who  paid  1,000  francs  taxes 
might  be  elected  as  members.  In  this  way,  out  of  a 
population  of  29,000,000  there  were  less  than  100,000 
voters,  and  not  more  than  12,000  eligible  to  be  elected  to 
the  Chamber.  Only  the  executive  could  initiate  legisla- 
tion, but  the  lower,  representative  chamber  had  control 
of  taxation.  Such  a  system  was  not  greatly  unlike  the 
government  of  Great  Britain  at  this  time.  It  was  ap- 
proved by  a  considerable  body  of  the  nation. 

The  reactionaries  and  the  returned  Emigres  were  by  no  Further 
means  content  with  this.'  They  hoped  to  bring  back  the  Progress 
old  order  completely.  Their  plan  was  first  to  restore  the 
Church,  and  give  it  great  power,  especially  over  education, 
and  thus  pave  the  way  for  a  return  of  other  things,  which 
the  Church  would  advocate  and  teach.  In  the  beginning 
they  could  not  get  the  approbation  of  Louis,  guided  first 
by  the  Due  de  Richelieu  and  then  by  Decazes,  who  leaned 
upon  moderate  and  liberal  support.  Altogether  the  years 
from  1816  to  1820  were  marked  by  wise  management  and 
sound  progress.  Much  greater  freedom  of  the  press  was 
given;  the  confidence  of  the  country  was  gained,  if  not  its 
enthusiasm;  and  loans  were  easily  floated.  Meanwhile 
the  Due  de  Richelieu  gained  the  confidence  of  the  Allies, 
and  in  1818  the  great  powers  decided  at  the  Congress  of 
Aix-la-Chapelle  to  withdraw  the  soldiers  still  occupying 
parts  of  France. 

This  period  came  to  an  end  when  in  1820  a  fanatic  as-     Reaction 


192 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


sassinated  the  nephew  of  the  king.  The  great  indignation 
aroused  by  this  enabled  the  reactionaries  to  restore  censor- 
ship of  the  press  and  suspend  the  safeguards  of  personal 
liberty  which  had  been  guaranteed  by  the  Charter.  A 
new  electoral  law  was  passed  to  give  them  control  of  the 
legislature.  It  did  away  with  the  secret  ballot,  which 
conduced  so  greatly  to  the  elector's  freedom  of  choice, 
narrowed  the  franchise,  and  gave  a  double  vote  to  citizens 
who  paid  1,000  francs  in  taxes,  substantially  the  landed 
interest.  In  the  election  held  now  the  royalist  reaction- 
aries got  control  of  the  Chamber,  and  the  Comte  de 
Villele  was  put  at  the  head  of  the  ministry.  Villele, 
thoroughly  reactionary,  was  yet  patient,  subtle,  and  very 
able.  He  went  about  the  work  of  restoring  the  old  regime 
with  great  skill.  He  remained  in  power  for  six  years 
(1822-8),  to  the  death  of  Louis  XVIII  in  1824,  and 
after  the  accession  of  Louis's  brother,  Charles  X.  In  the 
end  he  had  nearly  complete  success. 

His  plan  was  to  proceed  slowly,  meanwhile  curbing  the 
headstrong  zeal  of  his  companions  who  would  have  re- 
stored old  conditions  at  once.  He  believed  that  if  he  had 
on  his  side  the  vast  influence  of  the  Church  strengthened 
and  restored,  he  might  be  able  with  the  assistance  thus 
given  to  go  on  a  great  deal  further.  ^  And  he  believed  that 
the  middle  classes  and  people  of  substance  and  importance 
would  make  little  opposition  to  political  and  constitu- 
tional changes  if  business  were  good  and  if  wealth  in- 
creased. In  the  mean  time,  stage  by  stage,  the  power 
and  privileges  of  the  nobles  could  be  won  back  again. 

Therefore  in  1822  the  censorship  of  the  press  was  tight- 
ened, and  education  was  put  almost  entirely  under  the 
control  of  the  Church.  At  the  same  time  high  protective 
tariffs  were  levied  on  imports,  to  the  great  satisfaction 
of  manufacturers  and  owners  of  land. :  To  strengthen  his 
hold  on  the  legislative  assembly,  reactionary  peers  were 
added  to  the  upper  chamber,  and,  the  lower  chamber  being 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


193 


already  filled  with  his  supporters,  the  duration  of  parlia- 
ment was  extended  to  seven  years.  Secure  of  the  body 
which  made  the  laws,  he  proceeded  to  bring  forward 
the  measures  toward  which  he  had  been  working.  He 
had  now  the  added  support  of  the  new  king,  Charles  X, 
(1824-1830),  who  from  the  first  had  been  the  leader  of  the 
reactionaries,  and  who  was  at  the  head  of  the  noblemen 
and  churchmen  who  wished  the  confiscated  property  to  be 
restored.  For  the  present,  at  any  rate,  it  was  impossible 
to  get  away  the  lands  which  were  in  possession  of  pro- 
prietors who  had  bought  them.  This  was  recognized  by 
all,  and  the  Charter  of  1814  had  explicitly  promised  that 
the  titles  of  land  so  purchased  should  not  be  disturbed. 
Accordingly,  it  was  proposed  not  to  restore  the  confiscated 
lands,  but  to  compensate  the  former  owners  with  money 
appropriated  by  the  state,  and  a  law  for  this  purpose  was 
passed  in  1825.  Then  religious  bodies  were  established 
again,  and  the  Jesuits  allowed  to  return.  It  was  even 
proposed  to  alter  the  law  of  succession,  so  that  property 
need  no  longer  be  divided  equally  among  the  children, 
and  so  that  the  eldest  son  might  receive  the  largest  portion, 
thus  making  it  possible  to  build  up  great  estates  once 
more.  In  1827  Villele,  who  had  hitherto  had  eminent 
success,  was  overthrown  by  a  combination  of  the  reac- 
tionaries, who  thought  he  was  doing  too  little,  and  the 
liberals,  thoroughly  alarmed  about  what  he  Jiad  done. 

A  more  bitter  struggle  soon  followed.  By  1829  the 
issues  were  clearly  drawn.  It  was  apparent  that  a  very 
real  struggle  had  developed  between  the  liberals,  who 
feared  that  the  benefits  of  the  Revolution  were  being 
lost,  and  the  reactionaries  bent  on  restoring  the  old  condi- 
tions in  France.  The  royalists  were  already  trying  to 
divert  the  attention  of  the  people  to  foreign  affairs.  In 
1823  an  army  had  been  sent  into  Spain,  and  the  French 
people  rejoiced,  for  it  seemed  that  again  they  were  taking 
a  great  part  in  Europe's  affairs.     In  1830  the  conquest  of 


Compensa- 
tion for 
appropriated 
lands 


Charles  X 


194  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

Algeria  was  begun,  an  operation  destined  finally  to  put  an 
end  to  the  depredations  of  the  Barbary  pirates  and  also 
to  lay  the  foundations  of  a  new  French  colonial  empire. 
Revolution      (^     In    1829,    despite    the   opposition    of   the    Chambers, 
of  1830  Charles  appointed  a  ministry  made  up  of  ultra-royalists 

headed  by  the  Prince  de  Polignac.  This  minister  an- 
nounced that  the  government  would  soon  restore  aristoc- 
racy and  give  the  clergy  their  old  position  and  power. 
A  struggle  followed  with  the  Chamber  of  Deputies. 
Then  elections  were  held  which  returned  an  assembly 
still  more  hostile*  In  July  1830  Charles  proclaimed  three 
The  July  Ordinances  by  which  the  press  was  shackled,  the  franchise 

Ordinances  narrowed,  and  the  recent  elections  set  aside  as  invalid 
while  new  elections  were  proclaimed  for  September. 
/^Immediately  an  insurrection  broke  out  in  Paris.  The 
printers  and  publishers  urged  on  the  others;  the  working- 
men  threw  up  barricades  in  the  streets;  all  classes  fell  away 
from  the  king;  and  Charles,  having  sought  in  vain  to 
appease  the  people  by  revoking  the  Ordinances,  fled  into 
exile  to  England. 

The  Revolution  of  1830  carried  forward  the  work  of  the 
French  Revolution.  Like  the  English  Revolution  of 
1688  it  involved  no  radical  changes.  In  neither  case  were 
parliamentary  or  economic  reforms  brought  about.  In 
both  instances  a  dynasty  was  changed,  but  little  altera- 
tion was  made  in  the  system.  In  each  case  the  great 
(  achievement  was  that  reaction  was  prevented  and  the  way 

left  open  for  progress  in  the  future.  In  France  now  the 
government  was  put  into  the  hands  of  another  king,  Louis 
Philippe,  of  the  younger,  the  Orleans  branch  of  the  House 
of  Bourbon.  The  insurrection  had  been  made  by  men 
who  wanted  a  republic,  but  the  French  people  understood 
that  the  European  powers  were  not  willing  yet  to  tolerate 
another  republic  in  France,  so  monarchy  was  preserved 
The  new  for  a  time.     A  new  constitution  was  made  by  revising 

Constitution      the  Charter  of  1814.     It  took  away  the  power  of  the  king 


c 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


195 


to  proclaim  ordinances  for  the  good  of  the  state,  which 
had  been  the  basis  of  the  July  Ordinances  of  Charles  X.  ] 
The  Catholic  religion  was  no  longer  to  be  the  state  religion,  j 
though  it  was  described  as  the  religion  of  the  majority 
of  the  people.  The  censorship  of  the  press  was  abolished./ 
And,  above  all,  the  theory  of  divine  right,  expressed  in  the 
preamble  of  the  Charter,  was  now  omitted.  A  law  passed 
in  1831,  which  remained  in  force  until  1848,  regulated  the 
franchise.  The  double  vote  was  abolished.  The  franchise 
was  now  extended  to  those  who  paid  200  francs  a  year  in 
direct  taxes,  and  to  professional  men  who  paid  100  francs. 
As  a  result  of  this  there  were  about  two  hundred  thousand 
voters  in  a  population  of  thirty-two  millions. 

The  important  results  of  the  Revolution  were  that  the 
French  people  had  now  firmly  established  the  great  prin- 
ciples of  the  generation  preceding — equality  of  individuals 
and  constitutional  liberty.]  They  had  established  them 
firmly  because  their  king  was  no  longer  one  imposed  by 
the  Allies  and  ruling,  as  he  said,  by  divine  right,  but  a 
king  who  had  received  his  throne  from  them,  whose  power 
rested  on  the  will  of  the  nation. 

/  Louis  Philippe  (1830-48)  was  now  a  middle  aged  man. 
In  his  youth  he  had  taken  part  in  the  liberal  movements 
of  the  French  Revolution,  and  had  served  in  the  Revolu- 
tionary armies.  After  the  Restoration  he  had  lived  in 
Paris  as  a  simple  gentleman,  winning  the  regard  of  work- 
men and  bourgeoisie.  -After  the  flight  of  Charles  X,  when 
some  wanted  a  republic  and  others  a  limited  monarchy, 
he  had  been  invited  to  be  king  by  that  Chamber  of  De- 
puties which  his  predecessor  dissolved  just  before  the 
outbreak.  The  people  of  France  accepted  him,  and  so 
long  as  he  pleased  them  he  might  reign;  but  when  he  was 
seen  to  be  essentially  autocratic  in  his  nature,  and  when 
in  the  course  of  time  he  could  no  longer  please  most  of  the 
people,  then  he  was  to  be  overthrov/n  as  easily  as  he  now 
was  set  up. 


* 'Divine 

right" 

overthrown 


Results  of 

the 

Revolution 


Louis 
Philippe 


196 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


PoUtical 
parties 


Troubles 
under  the 
July 
Monarchy 


Attempts 
to  kill  Louis 
Philippe 


There  was  no  longer  a  struggle  between  reactionaries 
who  would  restore  the  old  regime,  and  liberals  who  would 
preserve  what  the  Revolution  had  given.  Politics  were 
complicated  and  confused;  there  were  several  parties  and 
numerous  leaders;  but  generally  speaking,  the  conserva- 
tives, led  after  awhile  by  Guizot,  and  the  liberals,  pre- 
sently led  by  Thiers,  both  accepted  the  government 
established  by  the  July  Revolution.  The  difference  was 
that  the  conservatives  believed  enough  had  been  ac- 
complished, while  the  liberals  wished  to  go  on  with  reforms 
which  they  thought  had  only  been  begun..  Generally 
speaking,  the  period  was  one  in  which  the  bourgeoisie  was 
in  control;  and  it  was  upon  the  middle  class  that  the 
power  of  the  king  was  founded.' 

There  was  much  unrest  and  confusion  at  the  start.  Ad- 
vocates of  a  republic  continued  troublesome,  and  although 
the  government  had  declared  that  censorship  of  the  press 
should  never  be  renewed,  there  were  repeated  prosecutions 
of  republican  newspapers  for  attacking  the  government. 
There  were  several  small  republican  insurrections.  More- 
over, the  Legitimists,  who  supported  the  heir  of  Charles 
X,  regarded  Louis  Philippe  as  a  usurper,  and  tried  to 
create  disaffection.  The  government  took  measures 
against  its  enemies  sufficient  to  make  many  believe  that 
liberty  was  in  danger,  yet  not  drastic  enough  to  quell  the 
spirit  of  its  opponents.  Six  times  attempts  were  made  to 
assassinate  Louis  Philippe,  the  most  notable  being  the 
Fieschi  Plot  of  1835,  in  which  a  Corsican  tried  to  kill  the 
king  with  an  infernal  machine.  But  in  the  reaction  and 
horror  that  followed,  the  government  was  able  to  pass  the 
September  Laws  of  1835,  by  which  special  courts  were 
established  to  try  conspirators  against  the  state,  and  a 
system  of  penalties  provided  which  practically  established 
again  censorship  of  the  press.  For  a  while  the  government 
was  made  stronger  than  ever,  but  these  laws  really  weak- 
ened it  by  alienating  liberal  and  moderate  people. 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


197 


Actually  the  king's  position  was  never  very  strong.  He 
had  been  put  upon  the  throne  not  because  he  was  popular, 
like  Napoleon,  nor  because  he  had  the  best  title  to  the 
crown,  but  since,  in  a  difficult  time,  when  opposing  fac- 
tions were  compelled  to  make  a  compromise,  he  seemed  the 
most  available  candidate.  At  no  time  was  he  really 
popular,  nor  was  his  bearing  or  appearance  such  as  ever 
to  inspire  reverence  and  admiration.  The  caricaturists 
loved  to  display  his  corpulency,  his  umbrella,  his  bourgeois 
manners.  He  could  and  he  did  give  France  a  stjible 
government  for  many  years,  and  during  that  time  his 
foreign  policy  was  such  that  the  enmity  and  suspicion  of 
other  countries  were  generally  avoided,  and  France  en- 
joyed long  years  of  peace  in  which  to  recover  her  strength. 
It  was  during  this  time  that  the  Industrial  Revolution, 
which  had  for  more  than  half  a  century  been  developing 
so  mightily  across  the  Channel,  also  began  a  great  develop- 
ment in  France.  The  new  industrialism  was  managed 
by  the  middle  class,  whose  interests  the  king  specially 
cared  for,  and  who  got  great  prosperity  and  wealth.  ■  But 
the  temper  of  most  of  the  French  people  then  was  such 
that  no  mere  material  success,  no  career  merely  prosperous 
and  quiet,  would  be  enough.  .'There  was  still  an  older 
generation  which  could  remember  the  glorious  days  when 
Napoleon  dominated  Europe  and  when  France  was  indis- 
putably leader  of  the  world.  Great  battles  had  been  won, 
great  triumphs  achieved,  with  resplendent  gloryand  renown. 
Now  this  was  past;  France  was  ruled  by  a  king  who  never 
seemed  kingly;  his  policy  led  to  nothing  spectacular  or 
showy.  Furthermore,  although  manufactures  and  wealth 
were  rapidly  increasing,  yet  there  were  now  in  France  the 
same  disquieting  problems — the  miserable  condition  of 
some  of  the  workmen,  the  widening  gap  between  employers 
and  employees,  great  factories  with  machines  and  numer- 
ous workers  largely  at  the  mercy  of  capitalist  masters—^ 
which  had  long  troubled  England;  so  that  even  though  the 


Position  of 
the  king 


Industrial 
Revolution 


Discontent 


198 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


c 

C 


^foreign 
policy 


Peace  but 
no  dazzling 
success 


itent 

with  the 

government 

system 


king's  policy  pleased  the  middle  class  and  got  for  him  their 
steady  support,  it  seemed  to  do  little  for  other  classes. 
Therefore  socialist  and  revolutionary  agitation  constantly 
increased.^ 

It  was^fterward  thought  that  Louis  Philippe  might 
have  got  the  support  and  enthusiasm  of  most  of  the  people 
had  he  embarked  with  success  in  adventurous  foreign 
relations.  There  was  much  sentiment  in  the  country 
that  France  should  intervene  to  assist  oppressed  peoples 
in  Europe,  as  once  she  had  done;  and  there  was  always 
the  desire  to  undo  the  settlement  of  1815  and  get  for 
France  her  old  position  again.  At  the  very  beginning 
of  his  reign  France  did  take  a  stand  against  Russia  and 
Prussia  who  proposed  to  force  the  revolted  Belgians  back 
under  the  rule  of  Holland;  but  Louis  Philippe  declined  the 
Belgian  crown  for  his  son,  and  he  did  nothing  to  assist  the 
Italian  and  the  Polish  people  when  they  also  rose  against 
their  mastersl.  ^  Steadily  he  refused  to  get  entangled  in 
war,  or  act  in  such  manner  that  the  eastern  and  central 
powers  would  combine  against  France.  ;  More  and  more 
the  king  himself  guided  foreign  policy,  along  with  his  most 
trusted  minister,  Guizot;  and  foreign  affairs  were  managed 
safely  with  skill  and  finesse,  but  never  so  as  to  bring  the 
dazzling  splendor  or  excitement  which  so  many  French- 
men wished  for.  And  so,  as  Lamartine  said.  La  France 
s'mnuyait.  There  was  no  glory  to  make  the  throne  secure, 
/  In  course  of  time  the  management  of  internal  affairs 
pleased  the  majority  of  the  people  no  better.  The  govern- 
ment was  completely  in  the  hands  of  the  king  and  the 
bourgeoisie.  The  July  Revolution  had  made  no  sweeping 
reforms  and  had  not  extended  democracy  or  control  of  the 
government  by  the  people.  /The  middle  class  supported 
the  king;  he  and  they  directed  policy;  and  measures 
were  passed  in  their  interests.  Louis  Philippe  and  the 
leaders  whom  he  most  trusted  believed  that  suflScient 
reform  had  been  made  in  1830;  they  took  their  stand 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


199 


firmly  by  the  arrangement  made  then  and  resolved  to 
resist  further  change.  Only  those  who  paid  500  francs 
taxes  might  be  elected  to  the  Chamber,  and  substantially 
the  franchise  was  confined  to  those  who  paid  200  francs. 
During  the  period  1840-48  the  government  of  France 
was  constitutional  and  parliamentary,  the  ministry 
depending  on  a  majority  of  the  Chamber;  but  since,  as  in 
England  in  the  eighteenth  century,  the  government  could 
give  appointments  or  rewards  to  members  who  supported 
it,  it  was  usually  not  diflScult  to  control  about  half  the 
assembly,  and  since  the  franchise  was  confined  to  the  mid- 
dle and  upper  classes,  and  the  electorate  contained  only 
about  two  hundred  thousand  voters,  it  was  easy  by  means 
of  bribery  or  manipulation  of  elections  to  get  all  the  addi- 
tional votes  that  were  needed.  Accordingly,  it  was  no 
more  possible  for  the  French  people  to  control  their  govern- 
ment at  this  time  than  it  was  for  the  people  of  the  United 
Kingdom  to  control  theirs  before  the  electoral  reform  laws.  ) 
/furthermore,  in  western  Europe  at  this  time,  economic 
aevelopment  and  the  continued  influence  of  the  French 
Revolution  were  stirring  up  greater  numbers  of  people 
to  demand  an  industrial  reform  and  such  change  in  the 
government  that  the  people  could  control  their  rulers. 
Socialism  was  rising  and  radical  reforms  were  being 
preached.  All  the  time  French  republicans  were  hoping 
that  a  republic  might  be  reestablished,  and  an  ever  larger 
number  of  discontented  liberals  were  demanding  that 
office-holders  be  excluded  from  the  Chamber  of  Deputies 
and  that  the  franchise  be  considerably  widened.  ^  But 
Louis  Philippe  and  Guizot  were  resolute  against  any  such 
changes.  Laws  were  passed  in  the  interest  of  the  bour- 
geoisie; unrest  grew  among  the  masses,   i 

By  1847  the  situation  in  France  was  much  like  that  in 
England  in  1831:  a  system  too  strong  to  be  changed  by 
ordinary  means,  popular  opposition  ominously  increasing. 
In  England  the  controlling  class  had  yielded  and  constitu- 


Legislative 
controlled 
by  the  King 


Discontent 

of  the       j  > 
masses   / 


The  Revolu- 
tion of  1848' 


800 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


/*  The  Second 
Republic 
1848-1852 


tional  change  was  made;  in  France  the  government  would 
not  yield  and  a  violent  outbreak  followed.  The  crisis 
came  in  February,  1848,  after  the  government  had  for- 
bidden political  meetings,  when  it  resolved  to  prevent  the 
opposition  leaders  from  holding  a  banquet  in  Paris.  Great 
crowds  collected;  barricades  were  thrown  up  in  the  streets; 
the  National  Guard  refused  to  put  down  the  insurgents. 
/The  king  would  now  have  made  great  concessions,  but  the 
"  republicans  were  determined  to  destroy  the  monarchy 
completely.  It  was  easy  to  do  this,  for  the  king  had  long 
since  lost  the  support  of  the  nation,  and  now  in  his  hour  of 
need  only  a  few  rallied  to  support  him.  He  abdicated, 
and  fled  to  England. 

Some  would  have  chosen  Louis's  grandson  as  king,  but 
the  mob  of  socialists  and  republicans  would  have  none 
of  it,  and  presently  the  Second  French  Republic  was  pro- 
claimed. This  Republic,  which  came  so  suddenly,  and, 
at  first,  with  so  little  bloodshed,  lasted  nominally  until 
December  1852.  But  all  this  period  is  extraordinary  and 
confused.  First,  for  a  week  a  provisional  government 
managed  affairs;  then  the  Constituent  Assembly  for  a  year, 
while  a  constitution  was  being  drawn  up;  thereafter,  the 
president  and  the  assembly  which  th^  new  constitution 
provided.  ) 

At  the  start  the  Provisional  Government  was  composed 
of  two  parties:  republicans^-followers  of  Lamartine  and 
others,  who  believed  a  republic  the  best  system  of  govern- 
ment for  France^and  socialists,  led  by  Louis  Blanc  and 
others,  who  favored  a  republic,  but  only  because  they 
believed  that  with  such  government  they  could  more 
easily  bring  about  the  social  reforms  that  they  favored. 
/^Their  great  object  was  to  effect  changes  which  would 
improve  the  lot  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people.  "The 
revolution  made  by  the  people  ought  to  be  made  fcyr 
Louis  Blanc  them,"  it  was  said.  Louis  Blanc  maintained  that  for  all 
there  should  be  the  right  to  work,  that  private  property 


The 
socialists 


FRANCE  BEFORE  1870 


201 


must  be  replaced  by  public,  and  that  industry  should  be 
organized  not  under  capitalists  but  in  cooperative  so- 
cieties, under  control  of  the  workmen  themselves,  who 
should  share  the  profits  among  themselves,  as  was  urged 
by  the  French  syndicalists  half  a  century  later.  The 
great  majority  of  the  people  of  France  then,  as  afterward, 
were  opposed  to  such  schemes. 

Some  great  reforms  were  made  at  once.  Universal 
suffrage  was  established,  so  that  the  electorate  was  in- 
creased to  nine  millions.  Freedom  of  the  press,  freedom  of 
assembly,  and  the  right  to  form  associations  were  pro- 
claimed, and  all  citizens  had  the  right  to  enroll  in  the 
National  Guard,  the  military  force  of  the  state.  Thus 
democracy  was  vastly  extended,  newspapers  and  cheap 
pamphlets  multiplied,  political  clubs  were  formed,  and 
some  of  the  activity  seen  during  the  first  years  of  the 
French  Revolution  was  now  seen  again.  The  government 
would  not  adopt  the  red  flag  of  the  socialists  for  the  state, 
as  the  workingmen  demanded,  but  a  commission  was 
established  under  Blanc  to  sit  apart  and  consider  the 
reforms  which  socialists  thought  necessary  to  be  made. 

They  had  advocated  cooperative  workshops,  for  which 
at  the  beginning  the  necessary  capital  was  to  be  advanced 
by  the  state,  and  in  which  the  enterprise  would  be  con- 
trolled by  the  workmen.  But  while  the  socialist  leaders 
were  planning  the  changes  which  they  wished,  the  Provi- 
sional Government  itself  set  up  National  Workshops, 
in  which  the  state  was  the  employer.  Such  workshops 
were  not  favored  by  Blanc,  and  it  was  at  once  apparent 
that  their  management  was  in  the  hands  of  men  opposed 
to  socialist  doctrines.  Actually,  the  government  had 
established  a  poor-relief  system,  putting  men  to  work, 
irrespective  of  their  training,  at  digging  and  similar  tasks, 
and  paying  them  the  uniform  wage  of  two  francs  a  day. 
There  was  much  unemployment  and  great  throngs  applied 
for  the  work,  until  there  was  not  enough  to  go  around. 


Reforms 


National 
workshops 


Not  co- 
operative 
workshops 


202 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  June 
uprising  in 
Paris 


f 


Significance 
of  the  in- 
surrection 
in  Paris 


Among  those  left  idle  great  dissatisfaction  arose,  and 
meanwhile  the  entire  scheme,  with  which  the  authorities 
associated  Blanc's  name,  was  brought  into  disrepute.  In 
April,  elections  were  held  by  universal  suffrage  and  the 
following  month  the  National  Assembly  met  to  draw  up  a 
constitution.  The  socialists  were  in  a  hopeless  minority 
in  this  body. 

At  once  the  Assembly  proceeded  to  oppose  the  socialist 
efforts,  whereupon  the  Paris  workingmen  rose  and  tried 
to  dissolve  the  Assembly.  But  the  National  Guard  up- 
held the  Assembly,  which  then  abolished  the  National 
Workshops.  The  socialist  workingmen,  seeing  the  things 
they  had  hoped  for  about  to  be  set  aside  entirely,  rose  in 
furious  insurrection.  A  military  dictator  was  appointed, 
and  for  four  days  in  June  1848  there  was  terrible  street 
fighting  in  Paris.  Many  thousands  were  killed  or  wounded; 
but  the  socialists  were  completely  defeated,  and  eleven 
thousand  prisoners  who  were  taken  were  at  once  con- 
demned to  be  deported.  In  1848,  as  during  the  first  French 
Revolution,  the  radicals  were  crushed  by  the  bourgeoisie. 

It  is  this  episode  of  the  aspirations  of  Louis  Blanc,  the 
Ateliers  Nationaux,  the  disappointment  of  the  socialists, 
and  the  death-struggle  that  followed  in  Paris,  which 
now  give  greatest  interest  to  this  Revolution  in  France. 
A  generation  later,  historians  looked  back  upon  1848  as  a 
year  in  which  revolutions,  beginning  in  Paris,  spread  to  all 
central  Europe,  overturning  established  governments  in 
Italy,  Austria,  Prussia,  and  other  German  states.  Very 
properly  it  seemed  that  this  year  of  revolutions  broke  down 
the  system  of  Metternich,  and  continued  the  French 
Revolution.  But  when  another  generation  had  passed, 
when  an  extreme  socialist  system  was  established  in 
Russia  by  force,  and  when  such  forcible  establishment 
everywhere  was  preached  as  desirable  by  advocates  all 
over  the  world,  then  the  June  revolt  of  the  workingmen  in 
Paris  in  1848 — like  the  Commune  afterward  in  1871,  and 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


203 


more  dimly  like  the  efforts  of  certain  radicals  in  Paris  in 
1793 — was  seen  as  a  distinct  step  in  a  movement  which 
might  do  no  more  than  express  discontent  and  cause 
trouble,  but  which  might  one  day  everywhere  challenge 
the  system  that  existed. 

/  It  was  difficult  for  the  National  Assembly  to  begin  its 
work.  It  was  forced  to  increase  taxation  very  greatly, 
thus  alienating  the  propertied  classes  and  the  peasants 
as  it  had  just  alienated  the  socialists  whom  it  suppressed. 
/  A  republic  was  proclaimed,  and  a  constitution  drafted  in 
which  the  government  was  to  be  exercised  by  a  legislative 
assembly  of  one  chamber  elected  by  universal  suffrage, 
and  a  president  elected  in  like  manner,  with  extensive 
powers  similar  to  those  of  a  president  of  the  United 
States.   ^ 

When  the  election  for  president  was  held  in  December 
1848  the  great  majority  of  the  people  voted  for  Louis 
Napoleon  Bonaparte,  nephew  of  the  great  Napoleon,  and 
now  head  of  the  Bonaparte  house.)  He  received  5,400,000 
votes,  nearly  three  times  as  many  as  were  given  to  all  his 
competitors  combined.  When,  the  following  May,  elec- 
tions were  held  for  the  Assembly,  monarchists  were  two- 
thirds  of  the  entire  number  chosen.  Apparently  there 
was  not  yet  firm  basis  for  a  republic  in  France. 

Louis  Napoleon,  who  had  long  cherished  ambition  to 
revive  the  glories  of  his  house,  had  respectable  abilities 
and  attainments,  but  his  principal  fortune  was  the  name 
that  his  uncle  had  made  great.  The  misery  of  France 
during  the  later  period  of  the  Napoleonic  Wars,  and  the 
humiliation  of  1815  had  been  passing  from  recollection, 
and  almost  all  classes  of  Frenchmen  now  remembered 
with  pride  the  glory  and  splendor  of  the  Empire.  The 
kings  who  came  after  the  Restoration  seemed  little  crea- 
tures beside  the  legendary  figure  looming  each  year  now 
vaster  and  more  grand.  A  new  literature  arose  concerning 
the  Emperor.     Napoleon  had  loved  France  well,  it  was 


The  Con- 
stituent 
Assembly 
of  1848 


President 
elected 


Louis 

Napoleon 

Bonaparte 


204 


EUROPE  ,  1789-1920 


/  Lotiig 

Napoleon 
overthrows 
the  As- 
sembly 


Coup 

d'etat 


Napoleon 
m,  1852- 
1870 


said;  he  had  fought  victoriously  against  a  world  in  arms; 
he  had  meant  to  bring  justice  to  all;  he  had  been  the 
guardian  of  the  French  Revolution;  and  he  had  died  at 
last  an  exile  far  from  France.  No  one  believed  in  the 
Napoleonic  legend  more  implicitly  than  Louis  Napoleon; 
no  one  profited  by  it  so  greatly.  Twice  he  had  attempted 
to  seize  power,  but  each  time  was  easily  overthrown.  He 
spent  some  time  as  an  exile  in  America,  and  six  years 
imprisoned  in  a  fortress  in  France.  He  had  escaped  to 
England,  and  then  returned  when  the  Revolution  of  1848 
began.  Now  suddenly  by  the  gift  of  fortune  he  was  head 
of  the  French  Republic. 

Neither  president  nor  Assembly  was  prepared  to  sup- 
port loyally  the  republic  which  they  served.  In  the  sum- 
mer of  1849  a  republican  uprising  against  the  government 
was  followed  by  repressive  measures.  Next  year  the 
Assembly  passed  a  law  restoring  indirectly  the  property 
qualification  for  the  franchise,  thus  debarring  a  third  of 
the  electorate  from  voting.  But  the  president  now  went 
beyond  the  Assembly.  According  to  the  Constitution  he 
might  not  be  reelected  at  the  end  of  his  four-year  term. 
Therefore  Napoleon  secretly  prepared  a  bold  stroke. 
December  2,  1851  he  arrested  many  important  leaders 
and  dissolved  the  Assembly.  Then  he  appealed  to  the 
people  to  judge  between  himself  and  the  legislature,  and 
asked  them  to  sanction  a  government  in  which  he  should 
be  president  for  ten  years.  The  opposition  was  without 
leaders  and  in  confusion,  and  resistance  was  sternly  re- 
pressed. Three  weeks  later  the  people  of  France  approved 
what  he  asked  for  by  an  enormous  majority,  and  in  Novem- 
ber of  the  year  following,  when  the  question  was  put  be- 
fore the  people  whether  the  Empire  should  be  reestab- 
lished, he  again  obtained  an  overwhelming  majority. 
Shortly  after,  the  Second  Empire  was  proclaimed  with 
Napoleon  III  as  ruler.  These  elections,  or  plebiscites,  had 
been  skilfully  manipulated  and  controlled  by  the  govern- 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


205 


ment;  yet  it  is  probable  that  most  Frenchmen  were  quite 
willing  to  have  an  empire  with  a  Napoleon  again. 

This  Empire  lasted  from  1852  to  1870.  At  first  the 
government  was  much  like  what  had.  existed  under  the 
Consulate  at  the  beginning  of  the  century  in  France. 
Universal  suffrage  was  indeed  preserved,  as  it  was  kept 
in  Germany  when  the  German  Empire  was  established 
some  years  later;  but  Napoleon  III  so  arranged  things 
that  the  people  of  France  had  as  little  control  as  was  left 
by  Bismarck  to  the  people  in  imperial  Germany.  The 
voters  were  to  elect  a  legislative  assembly,  but  it  was 
to  have  little  control  over  legislation  and  not  much  control 
of  taxation.  The  power  of  the  state  was  almost  entirely 
concentrated  in  the  hands  of  the  emperor  and  the  officials 
whom  he  appointed,  as  was  largely  the  case  with  the  Ger- 
man Empire  before  the  Great  War.  Furthermore,  the 
emperor  could  easily  control  the  elections  through  his 
numerous  officials  and  through  the  army,  and  he  com- 
pletely shackled  the  press. 
^  In  the  midst  of  annihilation  of  freedom  and  the  political 
repression  that  Napoleon  had  brought,  he  strove  to 
govern  France  well.  His  court  in  Paris  became  the  center 
of  a  gay  and  splendid  life.  In  1855  a  great  international 
exposition  was  held  in  the  city,  and  throughout  his  reign 
a  vast  scheme  of  improvement  was  carried  forward  which 
made  Paris  the  most  beautiful  city  in  the  world.  Rail- 
roads were  rapidly  extended,  canals  constructed,  and 
shipping  increased.  In  all  ways  he  strove  to  increase  the 
material  prosperity  of  the  country,  and  since  it  happened 
to  be  a  period  of  great  prosperity  and  expansion,  his  efforts 
seemed  to  achieve  great  success.  Furthermore,  he  tried 
to  assist  and  conciliate  all  classes  of  the  people.  Many 
things  were  done  by  the  government  to  aid  the  poor  and 
the  needy,  and  the  right  of  laborers  to  strike  was  con- 
ceded in  1864.  All  this  was  at  first  followed  by  much 
satisfaction.     Business  flourished,  the  finances  were  put 


The  Second 
Empire 


Success 
at  first 


206 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


His  position 
not  secure  , 


Crimean 
War,  1854-6 


Treaty  of 
Paris,  1856 


on  sound  footing,  the  army  was  made  strong,  and  his 
government  was  presently  recognized  by  all  the  other 
governments  of  Europe. 

None  the  less  Napoleon  III,  like  Napoleon  I,  held  his 
position  without  a  good  title;  and  as  the  years  went  on  he 
understood  that  his  position  was  not  secure,  and  that  after 
he  had  given  prosperity  and  order,  he  could  remain  in 
power  only  by  gratifying  the  people  with  glory,  and  by 
diverting  their  attention  from  domestic  problems  to 
matters  abroad.  Thus  he  was  driven  on  to  take  a  lead- 
ing part  in  European  affairs  and  to  try  to  give  France 
a  commanding  position  in  Europe. 

For  a  while  he  was  greatly  successful,  and  France  again 
became  the  leading  Continental  power.  To  please  the 
Catholics  he  had,  while  still  president,  laid  claim  to  the 
holy  places  in  Jerusalem.  Because  of  this  he  came  into 
conflict  with  Russia,  since  the  Tsar  resolutely  upheld  the 
claims  of  the  Greek  Catholic  Church.  This  dispute  dragged 
on  obscure  and  involved  from  1850  to  1854.  By  this 
time  Napoleon  was  able  to  get  the  cooperation  of  Eng- 
land, since  British  statesmen  were  alarmed  at  the  prospect 
of  the  destruction  of  Turkey  by  Russia.  Presently  the 
Crimean  War  was  begun.  French  soldiers  took  the  lead- 
ing part  in  capturing  Sevastopol,  and  it  was  at  Paris  that 
the  conference  assembled  which  made  the  treaty  of  peace. 
The  Treaty  of  Paris  was  the  first  great  European  settle- 
ment made  since  the  arrangements  completed  at  Vienna. 
It  was  concerned  mostly  with  Russia,  whom  it  thwarted  and 
checked,  and  with  Turkey,  whom  it  protected  and  admitted 
to  the  concert  of  European  Powers.  But  it  also  seemed 
to  mark  the  end  of  an  era  which  had  begun  with  the 
downfall  of  France  in  1814  and  the  treaties  that  followed. 
Now  in  a  new  era  France  was  the  leader  of  Europe. 

L'Empire,  c^est  la  paix,  Napoleon  had  said,  but  the 
Crimean  War  was  the  first  great  struggle  in  Europe  since 
1815.     England  as  well  as  France,  and  also  Piedmont 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


207 


which  had  joined  them,  gained  satisfaction  and  prestige 
from  the  conflict;  but  the  terms  of  the  treaty  were  soon 
set  at  naught,  and  England  and  France  were  both  of  them 
afterward  to  regret  the  part  they  had  taken. 

This  success  strengthened  Napoleon's  position,  and  also 
awakened  the  French  people  to  a  desire  for  further  glory 
and  greatness.  The  emperor  now  began  to  cherish  a 
magnificent  foreign  policy.  Grandly  but  not  clearly  he 
seems  to  have  conceived  the  idea  of  extending  France 
again  to  her  "natural  frontier"  of  the  Rhine,  and  aiding 
the  oppressed  and  submerged  nationalities  of  Europe  to 
obtain  their  freedom.  Soon  he  awakened  such  uneasiness 
and  suspicion  in  Europe  that  in  the  end  he  was  left  without 
a  friend;  and  his  policy  after  a  while  involved  him  in 
perplexities  from  which  his  moderate  ability  as  a  states- 
man could  never  extricate  him  entirely. 

Encouraged  by  Napoleon,  the  inhabitants  of  the  two 
Danubian  Principalities  elected  the  same  ruler  in  1859, 
thus  paving  the  way  for  the  establishment  of  the  Ruman- 
ian nation.  In  that  same  year  he  intervened  to  assist 
Piedmont  against  Austria.  The  Austrians  were  defeated 
in  great  battles  at  Magneta  and  Solferino,  and  all  Lom- 
bardy  taken  from  them.  Much  to  the  disappointment  of 
the  Italians,  Napoleon  then  ended  the  war  with  the  truce 
of  Villafranca,  which  was  followed  by  the  Treaty  of 
Zurich.  However,  the  Italians  gained  Lombardy,  and 
thus  achieved  the  first  great  stage  in  the  unification  of  their 
country.  In  return  for  the  services  rendered,  France  got 
the  Italian  provinces  of  Nice  and  Savoy.  But  all  too 
successfully  Napoleon  had  carried  forward  this  national- 
ist movement.  In  a  short  time  all  Italy  except  for  Rome 
had  been  brought  into  a  great  new  state,  and  Rome  was 
saved  for  the  Pope  only  because  Napoleon  occupied  it 
with  his  troops.  This  he  did  to  conciliate  the  French 
Catholics,  but  at  the  same  time  he  lost  the  friendship  of 
Italians.     ) 


Schemes  of 
Napoleon  III 


Assists  the 
Rumanians 
and  the  i 
Italians     ) 


"$ 


208 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Failures 


Mexico 


Relations 
with  Prussia 


After  18^9  Napoleon's  foreign  policy  resulted  in  a  series 
of  failures.  In  1863  when  the  Poles  rose  against  their 
Russian  masters  and  appealed  to  the  western  peoples  for 
help,  there  was  immense  sympathy  for  them  in  France, 
but  the  emperor  could  do  no  more  than  make  a  diplomatic 
protest,  which  helped  the  Poles  not  at  all,  while  it  alienated 
the  government  of  Russia.  From  this  occurrence  came 
disastrous  results  at  the  time  of  the  war  with  Prussia;  but 
the  misfortune  lay  hidden  in  the  future.  Two  years  before, 
in  1861,  France,  Great  Britain,  and  Spain  had  sent  an 
expedition  to  Mexico  to  protect  their  citizens  and  ensure 
the  payment  of  debts.  But  Napoleon  had  greater  designs, 
and  when,  the  next  year,  Spain  and  Great  Britain  w^ith- 
drew,  his  forces  overran  the  country.  (  By  1864  he  had 
established  an  empire  in  Mexico,  maintained  by  French 
troops  and  ruled  by  Maximilian,  brother  of  the  Emperor 
of  Austria,  to  whom  he  had  offered  the  crown.  This 
proceeding  violated  the  Monroe  Doctrine  of  the  United 
States,  and  in  1866,  after  the  Southern  Confederacy  had 
collapsed,  and  the  Union  was  completely  restored,  the 
f  American  government  protested,  and  France  was  com- 
pelled to  yield.  The  French  army  was  withdrawn,  and 
Maximilian,  who  would  not  desert  his  followers,  was  left 
to  his  fate.  He  was  soon  captured  and  shot,  dying  with 
chivalrous  bravery  in  a  land  far  away  from  his  home.  His 
wife,  who  had  gone  to  Europe  to  plead  for  assistance,  went 
mad  when  the  news  was  brought  to  her;  and  Napoleon's 
government,  which  had  sent  Maximilian  to  his  throne  and 
his  death,  never  recovered  from  the  disgrace  of  the  oc- 
currence. 

More  terrible  disaster  was  approaching.  Prussia  under 
Bismarck  was  strengthening  her  army  so  that  she  might 
soon  thrust  Austria  outside,  of  German  affairs,  and  her- 
self bring  the  German  peoples  together^  This  was  in 
accord  with  Napoleon's  ideas  of  nationality,  but  it  was 
no  more  to  his  liking  that  a  strong  Germany  should  be 


I 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870 


209 


created  under  Prussia  than  that  united  Italy  had  been 
established  under  Piedmont.  In  either  case  the  rise  of  a 
new  strong  power  near  by  would  make  France  rela- 
tively less  great  in  Europe.  Napoleon  had  no  desire  to 
see  a  Prussia  too  strong,  yet  he  was  willing  to  see  a  strong 
Prussia  balance  Austria's  power.  Bismarck,  who  was 
directing  Prussian  affairs,  could  never  hope  to  carry 
through  his  greater  designs  if  Napoleon  gave  Austria 
assistance  against  him.  Accordingly  he  played  a  game  of 
diplomacy  and  intrigue,  in  which  Napoleon  was  com- 
pletely outwitted.  He  held  out  to  the  emperor  hope  that 
France  might  obtain  compensations  along  the  Rhine,  so 
that  France  remained  neutral  in  the  war  between  Austria 
and  Prussia.  Napoleon  would  nevertheless  have  inter- 
vened, but  the  war,  which  lasted  only  seven  weeks,  was 
over  before  he  could  move.  When  he  tried  to  get  Ger- 
man land  by  the  Rhine,  Bismarck  resisted,  and  was  able 
to  arouse  German  sentiment  strongly  against  French  ag- 
gression. Napoleon  was  then  led  to  propose  that  he  be 
allowed  to  take  Belgium,  but  Bismarck  was  able  after- 
ward to  use  this  proposal  as  a  means  cf  inflaming  Eng- 
land against  France.  Accordingly,  when  in  1870  France 
declared  war  upon  Prussia,  Napoleon's  statecraft  had 
brought  it  about  that  every  power  of  any  importance  was 
alienated  from  France,  and  that  when  France  was  over- 
thrown and  dismembered,  not  a  government  would  come 
to  her  assistance.  In  the  early  part  of  this  war  Napoleon 
III  was  captured  by  the  Germans,  and  at  the  same  time 
the  enraged  people  cast  down  his  empire  and  proclaimed 
another  republic. 

During  the  latter  part  of  his  reign,  the  power  of  Na- 
poleon had  much  diminished,  and  he  strove  to  support 
it  not  only  by  more  adventurous  policy  abroad,  but  also 
by  making  concessions  at  home.  He  put  into  practice 
the  ideas  which  he  had  earlier  proclaimed:  that  after 
order  and  security  were  established  the  people  should  be 


Napoleon 
thwarted  by 
Bismarck 


The 

Liberal 

Empire 


I 


«10  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

admitted  to  greater  share  in  the  government  of  the  state. 
Year  by  year  the  legislature  was  given  larger  powers,  and 
in  1868  freedom  of  the  press  was  restored.  In  1870  the 
government  was  completely  transformed,  the  legislature 
being  given  such  power  as  Parliament  had  in  England, 
and  the  ministry  being  made  responsible  to  it.  In  May 
of  that  year  these  changes  were  approved  by  a  great  ma- 
jority of  the  people,  and  it  seemed  that  at  last  France  had 
in  the  "Liberal  Empire"  a  government  strong  yet  resting 
on  the  people.  In  a  few  months  this  was  all  swept  away 
by  the  disasters  of  the  Franco-Prussian  War. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

For  an  excellent  brief  account:  G.  L.  Dickinson,  Revolution 
and  Reaction  in  Modem  France  (1892),  essays  on  the  period 
1789-1871.  Also  F.  M.  Anderson,  Constitutions  and  Other 
Select  Documents  Illustrative  of  the  History  of  France y  1789- 
1901  (ed.  1909). 

The  Restoration:  Henry  Houssaye,  1815,  3  vols.  (1896- 
1905);  L.  Michon,  Le  Gouvemement  Parlementaire  sous  la 
Restauration  (1905) ;  Pierre  Rain,  U Europe  et  la  Restauration  des 
Bourbons  (1908). 

The  July  Monarchy:  Paul  Thureau-Dangin,  Histoire  de  la 
Monarchic  de  Juillet,  7  vols.  (2d  ed.  1888-92),  Roman  Catholic 
and  conservative,  the  principal  work  on  the  subject;  Louis 
Blanc,  Histoire  des  Dix  Ans,  1830-181^0  translated,  History  of 
Ten  Years,  1830-18^0,  2  vols.  (1844-5);  Georges  Weill,  Histoire 
du  Parti  RSpublicain  en  France  de  1814  ct  1870  (1900),  La  France 
sous  la  Monarchic  ConstitutionellCy  1814-18^8  (1912);  Agenor 
Bardoux,  Guizot  (1894). 

The  Revolution  of  1848:  Albert  Cremieux,  La  Revolution  de 
Fevrier  (1912),  the  best  account  of;  J.  A.  R.  Marriott,  editor. 
The  French  Revolution  in  184-8  in  Its  Economic  Aspects,  2  vols. 
(1913)^  contains  Louis  Blanc's  Organisation  du  Travail  (1839) 
and  Emile  Thomas's  Histoire  des  Ateliers  Nationaux  (1848); 
Octave  Festy,  Le  Mouvement  Ouvrier  au  Debut  de  la  Monarchic  de 
Juillety  2  vols.  (1908) ;  H.  R.  Wbitehouse,  The  Life  of  Lamartine, 
2  vols.  (1918). 

The  Second  Republic:  Pierre  de  la  Gorce,  Histoire  de  la 
Seconde  RSpublique  Frangaise,  2  vols.  (7th  ed.,  1914). 


FRANCE  BEFORE   1870  211 

The  Second  Empire :  P.  de  la  Gorce,  Histoire  du  Second  Em- 
pirCy  7  vols.  (4th  ed.,  1896-1905),  the  best  account,  clerical 
sympathies;^  Albert  Thomas,  Le  Second  Empire^  (1907);  Henri 
Berton,  ^Evolution  Constitutionelle  du  Second  Empire  (1900); 
Maurice  (Comte)  Fleury,  La  SocietS  du  Second  Empire,  3  vols. 
(1911);  Blanchard  Jerrold,  The  Life  of  Napoleon  Illy  4  vols. 
(1874-82),  best  in  EngHsh,  favorable;  P.  K  Fournier,  Le  Second 
Empire  et  la  Legislation  Ouvriere  (1911);  E.  OUivier,  L* Empire 
Liberaly  17  vols.     (1895-1914). 

The  .Crimean  War:  Diplomatic  Study  on  the  Crimean  War, 
2  vols.  (1882),  Russian  oflBcial  publication;  H.  Friedjung,  Der 
Krimkrieg  und  die  Osterreichische  Politik  (1907);  A.  W.  King- 
lake,  Invasion  of  the  Crimea,  9  vols.  (1863-1901). 

Congress  of  Paris:  Comte  d'Angeberg  [L.  Chodzko],  Le 
Traits  de  Paris,  du  30  Mars  1856  (2d  ed.,  1877);  E.  Gourdon, 
Histoire  du  Congres  de  Paris  (1857);  Sir  Francis  Piggott,  The 
Declaration  of  Paris  (1919). 

Mexico:  P.  F.  Martin,  Maximilian  in  Mexico  (1914). 


CHAPTER  X 

AUSTRIA,  THE  GERMANIES,  AND  THE 
RISE  OF  PRUSSIA 


Germany 
in  the 
eighteenth 
century 


People  not 
united 


Das  liebe  heilge  romsiche  Reich 
Wie  halts  nur  noch  zusammen? 
Goethe,  Urfaust  (1775). 

Les  diversites  de  ce  pay  sont  telles,  qu'on  ne  sait  comment  reunir 
sous  un  m^me  point  de  vue  des  religions,  des  gouvernements,  des 
climats,  des  peuples  m€mes  si  diflerents.  .  .  .  L'Allemagne 
6tait  une  federation  aristocratique;  cet  empire  n'avait  point  un 
centre  commun  de  lumieres  et  d'esprit  public;  il  ne  formait  pas 
ime  nation  compacte,  et  le  lien  manquait  au  faisceau. 
Madame  de  Stael,  De  L'Allemagne  (written  in  1810),  chap.  ii. 

Nicht  durch  Reden  und  Mehrheitsbeschlusse  werden  die  grossen 

Fragen  der  Zeit  entschieden — das  ist  der  grosse  Fehler  von  1848 

und  1849  gewesen — sondern  durch  Eisen  und  Blut. 

Speech  of  Bismarck  before  the  Budget  Committee  of  the  Prussian 

House  of  Delegates,  1862:    Hans  Blum,  Fiirst  Bismarck  und 

Seine  Zeit,  ii.  351. 

During  the  eighteenth  century  and  down  to  Napoleon's 
time  "Germany,"  like  "Italy,"  was  merely  an  expression. 
It  was  not  the  name  of  a  state,  and  it  scarcely  signified  a 
nation.  During  the  Reformation,  in  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, Luther  had  addressed  an  appeal  to  the  nobility  of 
the  German  nation,  but  he  was  using  terms  vague  and 
not  clearly  defined.  There  was  not  such  uniformity  of 
character  and  manners  that  the  Germans  could  think  of 
themselves  as  one.  The  people  of  the  Rhine  provinces 
and  Bavaria  were  much  unlike  the  inhabitants  of  northern 
Germany  and  Prussia,  the  two  being  as  dissimilar  as  the 
inhabitants  of  north  and  south  France,  or  the  people  of 

212 


8.    THE  GERMAN 


ONFEDERATION 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA    213 


Aragon  and  Castile.  But  whereas  in  Spain  and  in  France 
long  ago  there  had  arisen  a  strong  central  government, 
able  in  the  course  of  time  to  weld  together  diverse  pop- 
ulations and  make  them  feel  that  they  were  part  of  one 
whole,  in  Germany  this  did  not  exist. 

At  the  time  of  the  French  Revolution  there  were  three 
hundred  and  thirty  or  more  German  States — the  number  is 
differently  estimated,  and  diflScult  to  ascertain  exactly — 
some  of  them  powerful  and  important,  some  of  them  large, 
the  greater  number  insignificant  and  small,  but  most  of 
them  completely  independent.  Least  important  were  the 
territories  of  the  Knights  of  the  Empire,  some  of  whom 
ruled  with  despotic  power  and  complete  independence  over 
little  territories  a  few  miles  square.  Next  and  more  impor- 
tant were  the  free  cities,  fifty  in  number,  survivals  from 
early  medieval  time  when  cities  and  towns  had  complete 
independence  or  almost  independent  power,  which  after  a 
while  they  had  lost  in  most  countries  as  strong  central 
government  arose.  In  Germany  this  had  never  arisen 
and  such  cities  as  Hamburg,  Bremen,  Frankfort,  Liibeck, 
Augsburg,  and  others,  continued  with  the  political  power 
and  privileges  which  once  they  had  had.  More  important 
were  the  other  states,  some  insignificant  enough,  some 
like  Bavaria  and  Saxony  strong  and  important,  and  at  the 
very  top  Austria  and  Prussia,  greatest  of  them  all.  Aus- 
tria had  long  been  the  leader;  but  for  a  hundred  years 
Prussia  had  been  steadily  rising  in  importance,  her  power 
being  based  upon  careful  administration  and  the  best  army 
in  any  of  the  German  lands. 

All  of  these  jurisdictions  were  in  some  manner  bound 
together  in  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  which  meant  nothing 
very  simple  or  exact,  and  which  is  neither  easily  under- 
stood nor  defined.  In  the  fifth  century  the  Roman 
Empire  in  western  Europe  collapsed  from  internal  decay 
and  the  attacks  of  barbarians  from  without;  but  the  down- 
fall had  been  gradual  and  slow,  and  the  Empire  had  lasted 


The 
Germanies 


The  Holy 

Roman 

Empire 


214 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Karl  the 
Great 


No  Real 
German 
Empire 
established 


The  rulers 
of  the  parts 
virtually 
independent 


SO  long  that  men  would  not  believe  it  could  ever  end,  and 
afterward  believed  that  in  some  way  it  was  still  living  on. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was  never  restored,  but  because  of 
the  mighty  impression  it  had  made  on  men's  minds  it  was 
not  difficult  for  Charlemagne,  a  great  Germanic  conqueror, 
to  revive  something  of  it.  The  power  of  Karl  the  Great 
was  established  about  the  Rhine,  in  what  are  now  western 
Germany  and  France,  extending  thence  to  Spain,  in  an- 
other direction  down  the  valley  of  the  Danube,  and  also 
down  the  Italian  peninsula.  On  Christmas  Day,  a.  d. 
800,  he  was  crowned  at  St.  Peter's,  in  Rome,  Emperor  of 
the  Roman  Empire,  which  he  seemed  to  restore;  and  this 
empire  came  to  be  called  Holy  because  it  had  been 
established  under  sanction  of  the  Church.  After  Charle- 
magne it  soon  fell  to  pieces;  but  in  the  tenth  century  it 
was  revived  by  German  rulers,  and  thereafter,  so  far 
as  it  meant  anything,  it  signified  the  dominions  of  the 
German  rulers  who  had  themselves  crowned  emperors  in 
Rome,  a  custom  which  they  continued  until  1452. 

No  real  empire  ever  developed.  While  the  kings  of 
England  and  of  France  were  slowly  building  up  out  of  the 
feudal  fragments  around  them  strong  kingdoms  and  the 
beginnings  of  nations,  the  German  rulers,  trying  to  ac- 
complish too  much  and  uphold  a  great  empire,  lost  all 
control  over  the  outlying  parts,  and  wasted  their  strength 
in  the  vain  attempt  to  rule  Italy  and  Germany  together. 
Therefore  the  German  people  continued  to  be  divided 
imder  princes  and  feudal  lords,  like  France  in  the  early 
Middle  Ages,  even  though  the  name  and  the  outward 
dignity  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  lingered  on.  For  a 
long  time  emperors  were  elected  by  the  greater  princes 
of  the  German  lands,  but  after  1438  the  imperial  dignity 
remained  in  the  House  of  Hapsburg.  The  rulers  of  the 
separate  parts  did  much  as  they  pleased.  They  owed 
allegiance  to  the  emperor,  but  this  was  largely  a  form. 
The  various  cities  and  states  sent  representatives  to  an 


AUSTRIA,   GERMANY,  PRUSSIA  215 


imperial  assembly,  the  Diet,  but  this  assembly  was  not 
a  body  which  passed  laws  to  govern  the  whole,  for  it  had 
neither  revenues  to  spend  nor  any  armed  forces  to  support 
its  decisions;  rather  it  was  like  a  congress  of  ambassadors 
from  the  several  states.  Sometimes,  indeed,  the  decisions 
of  the  Diet  were  carried  out  by  the  Kaiser,  but  generally 
he  lacked  the  power  and  resources  to  enforce  them.  The 
real  basis  of  his  power  was  in  the  resources  of  the  territory 
over  which  he  ruled  directly:  Austria,  and  possessions 
like  Hungary,  Bohemia,  and  other  territories  which  had 
been  acquired  through  conquest  or  marriage.  Usually 
he  devoted  himself  for  the  most  part  to  the  care  and  in- 
crease of  his  own  possessions,  extending  his  power  south- 
ward and  eastward,  until  after  a  while  Austria  ruled  more 
Slavic  subjects  than  Germans. 

Some  Germans,  from  time  to  time,  seeing  the  weakness 
of  division,  and  knowing  how  their  weakness  made  it 
possible  for  foreigners  to  despoil  them  and  bring  war  and 
ruin  to  their  country,  dreamed  of  a  day  when  all  of  them 
might  be  truly  one  nation;  but  the  mass  of  the  people  were 
inert,  and  all  attempts  at  closer  union  were  thwarted  by 
the  selfish  interests  of  princes  who  wished  no  lessening 
of  their  independent  power.  So  the  Holy  Roman  Em- 
pire remained  a  curious  relic  survived  from  old  times, 
pompous,  weak,  meaning  little.  It  was  not  holy,  said 
Voltaire,  not  Roman,  not  an  empire.  Yet  it  would  be  a 
mistake  to  believe  that  the  witty  remarks  of  intellectuals 
in  the  eighteenth  century  exactly  represented  the  truth. 
Little  as  the  empire  meant  to  the  German  people  in  any 
substantial  way,  it  was  yet  revered  as  an  inheritance  from 
their  past,  it  vaguely  represented  former  greatness,  and  it 
was  the  symbol  of  their  nationality  in  the  present. 

There  was  small  chance,  however,  of  bringing  the  Ger- 
man people  together  in  a  better  union  while  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire  continued,  and  there  could  be  little  hope 
of  making  a  great  German  nation  so  long  as  local  interests 


Ths 

Hapsburg 

dominions 


Weakncss^ 
of  the 
Empire 


Failure  to 

achieve 

xmity 


216 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Napoleon 


Small  states 
absorbed 


End  of  the 
Holy  Roman 
Empire 


or  the  "particularism**  of  various  states  continued  to  be 
dominant.  The  eighteenth  century  came  to  an  end  with 
no  progress  by  the  Germans  toward  union  or  real  nation- 
ality, and  it  seemed  that  fate  was  denying  to  their  land  the 
unity  and  strength  which  long  before  had  come  to  French- 
men and  Englishmen  and  Spaniards. 

The  first  great  step  forward  came  at  the  beginning  of 
the  nineteenth  century,  when  the  victories  of  Napoleon 
brought  the  time-worn  fabric  of  the  empire  down  into 
ruins.  Ruthlessly,  but  with  the  constructive  ideas  of  a 
great  statesman,  Napoleon  swept  the  old  system  away. 
In  accordance  with  the  Treaty  of  Campo-Formio  (1797) 
and  with  following  arrangements,  German  princes  com- 
pensated themselves  for  the  territory  lost  when  France 
extended  her  frontier  to  the  Rhine  by  taking  possession 
of  the  ecclesiastical  states  and  many  of  the  free  cities  of  the 
empire,  and  this  was,  indeed,  ordered  by  the  Reichsde- 
putationshauptschluss  (decree  of  the  imperial  delegates),  in 
1803.  Then  when  Austria  had  been  completely  conquered 
at  Austerlitz  and  Prussia  overthrown  at  Jena,  not  only 
did  Napoleon  take  much  of  their  territory  away,  but,  to 
counterbalance  them,  he  strengthened  certain  states  of 
the  second  rank  dependent  on  himself,  by  giving  them 
much  of  this  appropriated  territory  and  at  the  same  time 
encouraging  them  to  absorb  the  little  states  within  their 
borders.  In  this  way  the  small  jurisdictions  of  the  knights 
of  the  empire  were  abolished,  and  altogether  the  number 
of  parts  into  which  the  German  people  had  been  divided 
was  reduced  from  about  three  hundred  and  thirty  to  thirty- 
eight.  Furthermore,  in  1806,  when  Napoleon  established 
the  Confederation  of  the  Rhine,  dependent  on  himself,  he 
declared  that  he  no  longer  recognized  the  empire.  A  few 
days  after,  the  Hapsburg  emperor  resigned  his  title,  and  the 
venerable  organization  came  to  an  end,  its  ruler  becoming 
now  the  first  emperor  of  Austria,  his  hereditary  dominions. 
Napoleon  did  all  this  for  himself,  not  for  the  German  people. 


—  AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA  217-- 


None  the  less,  what  a  long  line  of  German  heroes  and 
emperors  had  failed  to  bring  about  he  succeeded  in  doing; 
and  he  is  entitled  to  rank  as  the  first  and  one  of  the  greatest 
workers  in  unifying  the  German  people. 

The  influence  of  the  French  and  their  very  nearness 
had  brought  the  best  work  of  the  Revolution  into  western 
Germany,  abolishing  serfdom  and  feudal  survivals,  intro- 
ducing civil  equality  and  the  excellent,  simple  law  of 
Napoleon's  Code.  Similar  reforms  were  brought  about  in 
Prussia  by  the  minister,  von  Stein,  assisted  by  others  who 
labored  to  regenerate  the  people.  There  also  serfdom 
was  abolished  and  civil  equality  introduced,  while  educa- 
tion and  the  military  system  were  reorganized  and  greatly 
improved.  During  this  time  the  yoke  of  France  was  so 
heavy  on  Prussians  and  other  Germans,  and  they  so  hated 
the  foreign  tyrant,  that  their  common  German  nationality 
seemed  more  precious  than  ever  before.  For  a  while  there 
seemed  no  hope  of  deliverance,  but  after  the  Grand  Army 
had  perished  in  Russia,  the  Prussians  first,  then  other 
Germans,  rose  in  a  splendid  national  effort  and  completed 
the  destruction  of  Napoleon's  empire.  The  War  of 
Liberation  in  1813  was  the  work  of  the  people  of  Germany, 
not  of  their  sovereigns.  It  is  true  that  most  of  them  had 
risen  up  in  their  wrath  to  turn  the  invader  out,  and  that 
as  yet  it  was  only  the  intellectuals  and  a  few  others  who 
were  filled  with  strong  national  feeling.  Yet  many  of  the 
German  liberals  and  leaders  hoped  that  now  their  sover- 
eigns would  willingly  offer  better  governments,  and  that 
the  German  peoples  might  be  brought  together  in  one 
strong  union . 

Like  the  Italians,  the  German  people  were  soon  disap- 
pointed. The  leaders  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna  were 
little  inclined  to  take  account  of  new  aspirations  and 
passions.  They  were  striving  to  reconstitute  the  old 
Europe,  as  far  as  they  could.  Alexander  I,  Tsar  of  Rus- 
sia, for  the  moment  liberal  leader  of  Europe,  sympathized 


Reform  in 
the  Ger- 
manies 


Rise  of 

national 

spirit 


The  Con- 
gress of 
Vienna 


218 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The 

Deutschea 
Bund, 
1815-1866 


Character 
of  the 
Confedera- 
tion 


with  the  wish  of  Germans  for  a  better  arrangement,  and 
tried  to  assist  them;  but  with  respect  to  German  matters 
Prince  Mettemich  dominated  the  Congress,  and  he  had  no 
desire  to  see  the  German  states  bound  in  a  closer  union, 
since  in  such  organization,  he  clearly  foresaw,  Austria 
could  not  remain  leader.  His  eflForts  were  successful,  and 
no  further  unification  was  achieved.  Yet  the  work  of 
Napoleon  in  this  respect  was  not  now  undone,  for  the 
Germans  remained  in  thirty-eight  states  as  he  left  them. 

Out  of  these  states  the  Congress  of  Vienna  established 
the  German  Confederation.  It  was  to  be  governed  by  an 
assembly  or  diet  to  meet  at  Frankfort.  As  in  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire,  the  delegates  were  to  be  appointed  by 
the  sovereigns  of  the  states.  In  the  Diet  no  fundamental 
change  of  any  sort  could  be  made  without  a  unanimous 
vote,  probably  as  diflBcult  to  obtain  as  had  once  been  the 
case  in  Poland,  thus  precluding  from  the  start  any  change 
toward  better  government  or  closer  unity  of  the  parts. 
This  body  was  to  legislate  for  the  general  concerns  of  the 
German  people,  but  neither  its  power  nor  the  scope  of  its 
work  was  ever  defined,  and  it  had  no  capacity  to  enforce 
its  decrees.  Metternich  had  planned  this  assembly;  and 
Austria  had  the  presidency  in  it. 

Evidently  no  progress  had  been  made  toward  the  bet- 
terment or  unification  of  Germany.  No  nation  had  been 
formed;  there  was  no  national  flag;  no  strong  state  had 
been  founded,  nor  any  closely  knit  league.  As  political 
scientists  said,  it  was  a  Staatenbund,  or  league  of  States, 
not  a  Bundesstaat  or  federal  state.  Its  princes  had  kept 
almost  complete  independence  for  themselves.  Each 
one  might  have  his  own  diplomatic  representatives  abroad 
and  conduct  his  foreign  relations  as  he  pleased,  even  mak- 
ing alliances  with  other  countries,  except  that  no  member 
was  ever  to  make  war  upon  another.  Furthermore,  the 
Confederation  was  not  only  loosely  formed,  but  it  con- 
tained members  whose  principal  interests  were  outside. 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA  219 

A  great  part  of  Prussia,  the  non-Germanic  portion,  was  not 
in  the  Confederation,  and  two  thirds  of  Austria  was  left 
out.  Austria  would  certainly  place  her  particular  in- 
terests before  those  of  the  Confederation,  or  "  Germany." 

For  the  next  generation  German  patriots  and  liberals  Lack  of 
lived  on  with  hope  deferred.  Most  of  the  people  were  P'^'^sress 
occupied  principally  with  reconstruction  after  the  long 
wars  through  which  Europe  had  passed;  they  were  en- 
grossed in  the  simple  problem  of  making  their  living  under 
new  diflBculties,  and  could  give  scant  heed  to  reformers. 
The  recent  territorial  changes  in  German  lands,  the 
enlargement  of  Prussia  and  the  absorption  of  the  small 
German  states,  engaged  the  attention  of  the  princes. 
Most  of  the  rulers  desired  to  restore  former  conditions 
or  prevent  further  change,  if  they  could.  And  those  who 
strove  so  hard  to  unite  the  Germanics  were  themselves 
not  decided  about  that  which  was  best  to  do.  Above  all, 
Austria  continued  to  be  leader  of  the  Germanic  countries, 
and  Austria,  under  Metternich,  continued  to  desire  that 
the  old  system  of  things  should  remain. 

In  spite  of  the  defeats  of  the  Napoleonic  Wars,  and  Austria 
despite  the  large  changes  which  had  taken  place  on  her 
borders,  Austria  was  much  as  before.  She  had  changed 
almost  as  little  as  Russia.  For  her  the  French  Revolu- 
tion had  not  occurred.  In  her  domains  no  great  altera- 
tion took  place  until  about  the  middle  of  the  century.  Like 
Russia,  Austria  was  a  strange  and  conglomerate  empire, 
formed  of  many  pieces.  The  basis  of  her  power,  what 
linked  Austria  with  the  German  peoples,  was  the  territory 
around  Vienna,  bordering  on  the  south  German  lands,  the 
old  possessions  of  the  Hapsburg  House.  Here,  and  scat- 
tered about  in  other  parts,  dwelt  the  Austrian  Germans, 
pleasant  and  agreeable  folk,  but  politically  more  backward 
and  conservative  in  character  than  most  of  the  other  Ger- 
man peoples.  They  remained  as  the  Germans  elsewhere 
had  been  before  the  spread  of  the  Revolutionary  ideas. 


220 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Peoples  of 
the  Austrian 
Empire 


The  old 
regime  in 
the  Haps- 
burgdo-. 
minions 


The  Germans  of  the  Austrian  Empire,  because  of  higher 
culture  and  the  greater  wealth  and  position  they  had  for  a 
long  time  possessed,  dominated  the  other  peoples,  but 
they  were  only  about  a  third  of  the  entire  population.  For 
three  hundred  years  the  House  of  Hapsburg  had  been 
extending  its  dominions,  at  first  by  a  series  of  fortunate 
marriages,  then  by  conquest  at  the  expense  of  the  Turkish 
power  which  for  a  long  while  had  been  receding  southward 
toward  the  Balkans.  The  other  two  thirds  of  her  subjects 
lived  in  these  additions.  There  were  West  Slavs  in  Bohemia 
and  Moravia;  Poles  and  Ruthenians  in  Galicia;  there  were 
South  Slavs  in  Carniola,  and  Dalmatia,  along  the  Adriatic, 
and  in  Croatia  and  Slavonia  inland,  with  more  just  across 
the  empire's  borders  in  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  which 
Austria  would  acquire  in  the  future;  in  Transylvania  were 
more  Rumans  than  lived  in  the  adjacent  Turkish  prov- 
inces which  later  on  were  to  be  Rumania;  and  above 
all  there  were  the  Hungarians,  who  with  Transylvanians, 
Slovaks  and  South  Slavs  composed  Hungary,  the  other 
half  of  the  empire.  In  this  aggregation  the  peoples  were 
divided  from  one  another  by  race,  religion,  and  speech. 
Towards  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  attempts  had 
been  made  to  Germanize  the  non-Germanic  populations, 
and  had  these  attempts  borne  fruit  Austria  might  later 
on  have  become  a  powerful  and  unified  state;  but  they  had 
signally  failed,  and  Bohemians,  Hungarians,  Rumanians, 
and  South  Slavs,  remained  quiescent,  indeed,  for  they 
lived,  most  of  them,  in  ignorance  and  serfdom,  ruled  by 
nobles  or  their  German  masters,  but  they  continued  un- 
assimilated,  with  no  love  and  little  loyalty  for  the  empire. 

Such  an  empire  could  be  held  together  most  surely  in 
the  old  manner.  So  long  as  education  and  industrial 
progress  could  be  kept  away,  so  long  as  most  of  the  people 
were  in  lowly  servitude  under  nobles  attached  to  the 
Austrian  government,  that  long,  most  likely,  would  there 
be  no  rebellions  for  Hungarian  or  Bohemian  independence. 


m 


g22 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Mettemich's 
system 
in  central 
Europe 


It  would  be  expedient  to  cheek  all  progress  in  neighbor- 
ing German  lands;  since  probably,  as  conditions  there 
became  better,  the  German  peoples  or  their  rulers,  bring- 
ing about  real  union,  would  make  Germany  prosperous 
and  great;  and  when  that  time  came  there  would  be  no 
more  of  Austrian  leadership  in  central  Europe,  for  in  a 
Germany  really  unified  and  progressive  there  could  be  no 
place  for  an  Austria  most  of  whose  territory  even  now  lay 
outside  the  Germanic  Confederation,  and  most  of  whose 
peoples  were  of  races  alien  and  subject. 

The  Austria  of  Metternich  and  the  Germanic  Confedera- 
tion continued  to  a  great  extent  to  be  lands  of  the  old 
regime.  In  Austria  serfdom  and  special  privilege  lasted 
on  as  before.  Throughout  the  Germanic  Confederation 
were  reaction  and  repression.  The  object  of  Metternich 
and  those  who  followed  his  system  was  to  keep  out  all 
ideas  foreign  or  new,  which  were  thought  to  be  dangerous, 
and  to  prevent  all  change.  Education  was  carefully  super- 
vised and  controlled.  Austrians  were  forbidden  to  travel 
abroad,  and  foreigners  were  kept  out  as  much  as  could  be. 
There  was  strict  censorship  of  the  press,  and  of  the  theater, 
and  government  spies  everywhere  prowled  about  to  listen 
at  lectures,  to  watch  students,  to  report  conversations,  to 
discover  what  might  be  dangerous  to  the  state.  In 
Austria  it  was  not  difficult  to  accomplish  what  was  de- 
sired; the  mass  of  the  people  remained  in  their  lowly  condi- 
tion, paid  their  crushing  taxes,  and  hardly  stirred  against 
the  German  masters  above  them;  while  the  government 
remained  unreformed,  corrupt,  inejQBcient.  But  in  the 
German  countries  near  by  it  was  far  less  easy  to  maintain 
the  old  system,  for  into  western  Germany  the  spirit  of 
France  had  entered  profoundly;  for  a  while  French  in- 
fluence had  been  the  guiding  force,  and  Prussia  had  raised 
herself  from  humiliation  and  defeat  by  enacting  some 
of  the  reforms  which  the  French  Revolution  brought  else- 
where.   Nevertheless,  for  the  time  the  Congress  of  Vienna 


AUSTRIA,   GERMANY,  PRUSSIA     223 


left  things  much  as  before,  and  the  German  princes,  for- 
getting the  promises  made  in  their  need,  followed  where 
Metternich  led  them.  Some  of  the  German  states — Wei- 
mar, Bavaria,  Wurtemberg,  Baden — got  constitutions, 
but  most  of  them  did  not;  and  the  government  of  Prussia 
was  reactionary  and  strongly  repressive. 

Accordingly  there  was  much  discontent  among  the  upper 
intellectual  classes  in  Prussia  and  the  smaller  German 
states,  particularly  around  the  universities.  In  Prussia, 
moreover,  there  still  remained  patriotic  societies,  like  the 
BursckenschafU  which  had  done  so  much  to  arouse  the 
young  men  against  Napoleon's  rule.  Great  suspicion 
was  shown  now  by  the  governments  toward  these  societies 
and  toward  the  university  students.  In  1817  members 
of  the  Burschenschaft  from  various  universities  celebrated 
at  the  Wartburg  Castle  the  anniversary  of  Luther's  theses 
and  also  of  the  battle  of  Leipzig,  and  there  they  burned 
certain  reactionary  writings.  This  was  magnified  as  a 
most  dangerous  event.  Two  years  later  a  student  stabbed 
to  death  a  certain  Kotzebue,  known  then  as  a  dramatist 
of  some  little  importance  but  still  better  as  a  spy  serving 
Russia.  As  a  result  of  these  occurrences  Frederick  Wil- 
liam III  of  Prussia  gave  full  support  to  Metternich's  ideas, 
and,  some  of  the  other  states  consenting,  Metternich  had 
passed  through  the  Diet  of  the  Confederation  the  Carlsbad 
Decrees  of  1819.  These  decrees  established  drastic  super- 
vision of  universities  and  strict  censorship  of  the  press, 
student  societies  were  prohibited,  and  a  declaration  was 
made  against  constitutional  reforms  like  those  which 
had  been  brought  to  pass  in  England  and  France.  It  was 
about  this  time  that  the  Tsar  of  Russia,  who  had  inclined 
toward  liberalism  before,  became  the  strongest  advocate 
of  Metternich's  principles.  "Tell  me  what  you  desire," 
he  said,  "I  will  do  it."  Therefore  from  this  time,  the 
"Holy  Alliance,"  which  had  been  established  in  the  first 
place  from  the  best  of  motives,  and  for  the  one  great  pur- 


Discontent 
in  the  Ger- 
man coun- 
tries 


The 

Carlsbad 

Decrees 


224 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Reaction 
and  political 
stagnation 


Repression 


The  Indus- 
trial Revolu- 
tion 


pose  of  maintaining  the  settlement  of  1815,  now  became 
also  the  great  engine  of  oppressive  reaction,  and  thus 
got  the  reputation  which  made  it  so  hateful  to  men  in 
after  days. 

In  the  Germanic  Confederation  the  Carlsbad  Decrees 
remained  to  dominate  the  life  of  the  people  for  the  next 
thirty  years.  There  was  to  be  no  further  political  prog- 
ress and  little  betterment  of  conditions  until  the  Revolu- 
tion of  1848  swept  over  central  Europe.  It  is  true  that 
the  Revolution  of  1830,  which  produced  such  important 
changes  in  Belgium  and  France,  had  effects  in  some  of  the 
lesser  German  states,  but  in  Germany,  as  in  Italy,  1830 
produced  no  great  alteration.  Durmg  the  remainder  of 
Metternich's  age,  there  appeared  to  be  almost  no  progress 
at  all,  and  in  the  long  years  of  this  stagnation  the  hopes  of 
German  liberals  almost  died.  Spies  and  oflScials  of  the 
governments  persecuted  the  men  who  had  helped  to 
liberate  Germany  from  Napoleon,  and  who  now  looked 
forward  to  still  better  things.  Jahn,  who  had  founded 
the  Prussian  gymnastic  societies,  was  thrust  into  prison. 
Amdt,  whose  poems  had  so  stirred  the  German  youth  in 
the  glorious  days  of  the  uprising,  was  persecuted  and 
driven  out  of  his  profession.  Emissaries  listened  to 
the  words  of  the  greatest  preachers  and  professors.  Some 
books  were  kept  out  of  Germany,  and  some  were  sup- 
pressed. Most  of  the  old  governments  continued  as 
conservative  as  ever,  and  the  Diet  of  the  Confederation 
held  the  Germanic  states  together  with  as  little  effect  as 
before. 

But  during  these  long,  slow  years,  changes  were  taking 
place  which  silently  brought  enormous  consequences.  Dur- 
ing the  period  from  1815  to  1848  economic  causes  were 
gradually  eating  away  the  very  foundations  of  the  old 
order;  the  Industrial  Revolution  began  its  work  in  central 
Europe  as  in  Belgium  and  France.  Hitherto,  as  from  time 
inmaemorial,  most  of  the  people  had  been  engaged  in 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA    225 


agricultural  work,  and  there  were  now  little  commerce 
and  manufacturing,  and  few  big  cities,  except  the  capitals 
and  political  centers.  But  during  the  second  quarter  of 
the  nineteenth  century  machines  and  manufacturing  on  a 
large  scale  began  to  appear  in  Germany  and  Austria,  and 
slowly  railroads  were  developed.  Workmen  were  assem- 
bled together  in  large  numbers,  means  of  communication 
were  improved,  and  a  prosperous  middle  class  developed. 
There  was  not  so  much  of  all  this  as  had  appeared  in  France 
and  much  less  than  in  England,  but  altogether  a  consider- 
able amount.  The  rise  of  a  bourgeoisie  presently  pro- 
duced an  important  class  out  of  sympathy  with  the  old 
system  of  politics  and  government,  and  radical  feelings 
were  presently  disseminated  among  a  larger  and  larger 
number  of  the  industrial  workers.  The  reactionaries 
would  have  liked  to  keep  out  railroads  and  the  new  in- 
dustrialism, but  here  they  were  working  against  forces 
which  they  could  neither  control  nor  understand.  For 
many  years  Metternich's  police  and  spies  seemed  to  pre- 
vent all  progress  and  change,  but  after  a  while  his  regime 
was  left  almost  without  a  foundation. 

This  was  evident  in  1848.  In  that  year  the  Orleans 
Monarchy  was  overthrown  by  a  sudden  revolution  in 
Paris.  At  once  the  movement  spread  far  outside  of 
France;  and  all  through  central  Europe  the  existing  ar- 
rangement went  down  in  ruins. 

When  the  news  of  the  uprising  in  Paris  arrived  at 
Vienna,  the  government  at  once  lost  control,  and  Met- 
ternich  was  compelled  to  flee  from  the  city.  The  govern- 
ment found  itself  helpless,  and  immediately  promised 
far-reaching  reforms.  Freedom  of  the  press  was  estab- 
lished, and  a  National  Guard  of  the  citizens.  April  25th, 
a  new  constitution  was  issued  for  the  Austrian  dominions. 
It  established  civil  and  religious  freedom,  and  instituted  a 
legislature,  a  Reichstag,  of  two  chambers,  to  which  the 
ministers  were  to  be  responsible;  and  a  little  later,  a  legisla- 


Middle 
Class 


The  Revolu- 
tion of  1848 


Reforms  in 
Austria 


226 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Revolution 
of  1848  in 
Prussia 


Reaction 


Attempt  to 
make  a 
united  Ger- 
many 


ture  of  a  single  chamber  with  universal  manhood  suffrage. 
The  Imperial  Court,  already  deeply  affronted  at  having 
to  make  concessions  which  it  granted  merely  to  save  it- 
self, now  withdrew  from  Vienna  to  Innsbruck,  which 
shortly  afterward  became  the  center  of  the  forces  of 
aristocracy  and  reaction. 

Meanwhile  there  had  been  revolutions  in  Prussia  and 
other  German  states,  where  the  people  demanded  religi- 
ous freedom,  freedom  of  the  press,  trial  by  jury,  and 
governments  responsible  to  representatives  elected  by  the 
people.  In  March,  the  people  of  Berlin  rose  in  insurrec- 
tion and  made  barricades  in  the  streets.  The  king, 
Frederick  William  IV,  at  whose  accession  there  had  been 
hope  of  reform,  but  who  had  made  no  liberal  changes,  was 
compelled  to  proceed  through  the  streets  of  his  city  ac- 
knowledging the  changes  brought  about.  In  Prussia, 
however,  as  in  France  at  the  same  time,  the  revolution  was 
followed  almost  immediately  by  reaction,  and  for  the  same 
reason.  As  soon  as  the  middle  class  had  achieved  the 
reforms  that  it  wished,  it  became  alarmed  at  what  the 
workingmen  of  the  lower  class  proposed  to  get,  and  pre- 
sently the  Prussian  bourgeoisie  rallied  to  support  the  king, 
so  as  to  get  his  support  against  the  workmen.  This  made 
it  easier  for  the  conservative  forces  in  the  kingdom  to 
recover  their  power.  An  assembly  had  been  called  to  draw 
up  a  constitution  for  Prussia.  Presently  the  reactionaries 
caused  this  assembly  to  be  dismissed,  and  the  king,  of  his 
own  will  and  grace,  granted  to  the  people  a  constitution 
destined  long  to  remain  in  force  and  long  to  be  regarded 
as  one  of  the  least  liberal  constitutions  in  Europe. 

While  reform  was  dying  in  Prussia  and  while  Austria 
was  also  preparing  for  reaction,  German  progressives  were 
attempting  the  still  grander  scheme  of  making  a  liberal, 
united  Germany.  For  a  long  time  there  had  been  desire 
for  a  real  imion  of  the  German  states,  though  this  had 
been  successfully  opposed  during  Metternich's  years.     In 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA    227 


1847  certain  liberals  had  met  to  declare  that  there  ought 
to  be  a  national  parliament  for  the  German  people.  To 
this  feeling  the  Paris  revolution  now  gave  a  powerful  im- 
pulse, and  March  5,  1848,  a  group  of  leaders  meeting  at 
Heidelberg,  proposed  that  a  parliament  be  summoned. 
The  Diet  of  the  Confederation  was  forced  to  agree;  and  a 
German  parliament,  elected  by  manhood  suffrage,  as- 
sembled at  Frankfort. 

May  13,  1848,  the  Frankfort  Parliament  opened  its 
sessions.  Unfortunately,  its  members  were  not  fitted 
for  the  work  imdertaken.  They  had  grand  general  ideas 
about  the  nobility  of  man  and  democratic  rights,  but  they 
lacked  practical  experience  with  government  itself.  In 
Germany,  as  in  France,  the  great  mass  of  the  people  had 
never  had  any  part  in  the  government  of  their  country, 
and  now  they  were  found  unequal  to  the  task  when  they 
attempted  to  make  constitutions.  The  Parliament  of 
Frankfort  was  only  possible  because  for  the  moment 
Austria,  who  would  surely  have  prevented  such  a  gather- 
ing if  she  could,  was  in  the  throes  of  revolution,  and  be- 
cause temporarily  the  princes  of  the  other  states  had  to 
bow  to  the  will  of  their  people.  This  condition  would 
almost  certainly  not  long  endure:  either  there  would  be 
more  complete  revolution,  or  reaction  to  the  old  state  of 
affairs.  But  the  members  of  the  Frankfort  Parliament, 
which  Karl  Marx  afterward  described  as  an  "assembly 
of  old  women,"  spent  long  time  in  debating  the  funda- 
mental ideas  of  their  system.  At  the  end  of  the  year  they 
were,  indeed,  able  to  proclaim  equality  before  the  law,  and 
freedom  of  press,  petition,  and  meeting,  but  they  had  not 
yet  formed  a  strong  government  or  got  for  their  system 
the  strength  and  support  without  which  it  could  never  be 
established. 

The  great  problem  confronting  them  at  the  outset  was 
what  to  do  with  respect  to  Austria.  The  entire  Hapsburg 
state  might  be  embodied  in  a  new  Germanic  union,  but 


The  Frank- 
fort Parlia- 
ment 


Failure 


The  Prob- 
lem of 
Austria 


228 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Austria 

excluded 

from  the 

proposed 

German 

Empire 


Prussia 
refuses  to 
accept 
leadership 


that  seemed  not  desirable,  and  moreover  the  Austrian 
dominions  seemed  about  to  fall  into  fragments.  It  was 
also  proposed  to  exclude  Austria  altogether,  but  as  yet 
this  conflicted  too  much  with  old  associations  and  long- 
settled  opinion  to  be  accepted.  Accordingly,  a  com- 
promise was  adopted,  the  constitution  providing  that  no 
part  of  the  "German  Empire"  might  contain  non-German 
lands.  In  the  case  of  such  a  state  as  Austria,  provided  that 
the  German  parts  were  taken  into  the  new  German  federa- 
tion, the  Slavic  and  Hungarian  parts  might  thereafter 
be  connected  only  through  personal  union  under  the 
Austrian  ruler.  Since  in  any  strong  union  this  would 
mean  the  partition  of  Austria,  she  refused  to  accept  the 
arrangement,  and  thereupon  was  excluded  altogether. 
This  being  settled,  the  members  proceeded  to  arrange  the 
form  of  the  government.  At  the  end  of  March,  1849. 
they  decided  that  the  new  Germany  should  be  an  empire, 
with  the  king  of  Prussia  as  hereditary  ruler.  The  scheme 
was  accepted  by  a  large  number  of  the  smaller  German 
states,  but  Austria  announcing  that  she  would  not  sufiFer 
herself  to  be  expelled  from  the  Confederation,  the  outcome 
of  the  affair  now  hinged  altogether  upon  what  action 
Prussia  would  take.  Prussia  was  more  and  more  looming 
up  as  the  natural  leader  of  the  Germanics,  though  it  was 
still  hard  for  many  people  to  turn  their  hearts  from  the 
old  allegiance  to  Austria.  German  unity  was  some  years 
later  to  be  achieved  under  Prussian  leadership;  but  now 
Frederick  William  IV  shrank  from  an  undertaking  which 
would  surely  involve  him  in  conflict  with  Austrian  power, 
and  possibly  with  that  of  Russia,  who  had  come  to  Aus- 
tria's assistance.  Moreover,  he  had  no  sympathy  with 
the  revolutionary  movement  which  had  brought  the 
Frankfort  Parliament  into  being.  As  Bismarck  after- 
ward declared,  the  king  looked  upon  this  assembly  as  a 
revolutionary  body.  He  would  only  accept  the  crown  of 
a  German  Empire  if  the  princes  of  the  various  states  asked 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA 


him.  Therefore  he  refused  to  take  the  leadership  that 
was  offered.  Then,  when  not  only  Austria  but  Prussia 
had  refused  to  accept  the  Constitution  of  Frankfort, 
Bavaria,  Saxony,  Hanover,  and  Wiirtemberg  likewise 
declined,  and  the  work  of  the  Parliament,  accepted  only 
by  the  smaller  states,  came  to  an  ignominious  end. 

The  failure  at  Frankfort  in  1849  was  afterward  seen 
to  have  been  a  turning  point  in  the  history  of  the  German 
people,  and,  indeed,  in  the  history  of  Europe  in  the  nine- 
teenth century.  The  two  great  forces  in  the  life  of 
European  peoples  during  that  hundred  years  were  the 
tendency  toward  democracy  and  self-government  and  the 
tendency  to  realize  nationality.  Slowly  and  with  normal 
development  democracy  was  going  forward  in  the  British 
Isles,  and  more  slowly,  in  face  of  greater  obstacles,  in 
France  and  other  countries  of  western  Europe.  Hitherto 
it  had  made  little  progress  in  central  Europe,  but  in  1848 
came  the  great  effort  of  the  German  liberals.  Had  they 
been  able  to  cope  more  successfully  with  the  difficulties 
which  lay  in  their  way,  had  they  been  able  to  erect  limited 
constitutional  monarchy,  had  they  been  able  to  bring 
about  the  unification  of  the  German  peoples,  then  it  may 
well  be  that  the  entire  political  history  of  Germany  in  the 
years  following  would  have  been  very  different.  There 
might  have  been  no  battles  of  Sadowa  and  Sedan,  nor 
the  terrible  struggles  of  1914-18.  But  actually,  after  the 
liberals  had  stirred  the  hearts  of  the  people,  they  got 
nothing  done  and  the  failing  system  of  a  loose  Germanic 
Confederation  and  rule  by  sovereigns  in  the  old  way  con- 
tinued. The  German  peoples  turned  from  republicans 
and  liberals  with  contempt.  Profound  conviction  grew 
that  the  great  work  still  to  be  done  must  be  done  not  by 
parliaments  and  the  people,  but  by  power  and  force  and 
under  the  auspices  of  the  princes  and  upper  class.  Some- 
what later  it  was  brought  about  through  the  military 
power  of  Prussia;  its  development  went  forward  upon  the 


Significance 
of  the 
failure  at 
Frankfort 


230 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


battle-field;  united  Germany  was  made  by  the  sword;  and 
the  government  then  established  was  left  in  the  hands  of 
princes  and  nobles.  Then  the  military  might  which  had 
accomplished  so  much  was  glorified  by  the  German  people, 
and  their  leaders  made  them  hope  for  still  greater  power 
through  greater  armies  led  by  their  princes.  All  Europe 
became  an  armed  camp,  with  Germany  an  ever  greater 
danger  and  menace  to  other  nations.  It  was  the  failure 
of  1848  and  1849  which  definitively  caused  the  German 
people  to  leave  the  path  along  which  their  western  neigh- 
bors were  then  going  forward.  Not  until  after  their 
Empire,  which  had  been  established  on  the  battle-field, 
had  been  shattered  on  the  field  of  battle  was  there  pos- 
sibility of  erecting  again  a  German  government  based  on 
the  German  people  themselves. 

The  failure  of  Prussia  to  accept  leadership,  and  the 
collapse  of  the  Parliament  of  Frankfort,  were  largely 
owing  to  the  recovery  of  Austrian  power.  In  1848  that 
power  had  been  broken  to  pieces;  the  subject  peoples,  so 
long  bowed  low,  had  risen  and  broken  away  from  her 
Empire.  While  the  liberals  and  the  lower  classes  of 
Vienna  were  extorting  a  constitution  and  universal  suf- 
frage in  Austria  proper,  the  Hungarians,  the  Bohemians, 
the  Italians  all  shook  off  the  Austrian  yoke,  and  the  numer- 
ous other  peoples  in  the  empire  were  aroused  into  wild 
excitement. 

The  northern  Italians,  subject  to  Austria  or  under  her 
influence,  hated  their  masters  as  alien  tyrants,  and  longed 
for  the  day  of  their  deliverance.  Now  in  the  midst  of 
Austria's  necessities  they  rose  and  declared  their  inde- 
pendence; and  it  seemed  that  under  the  lead  of  Piedmont  a 
united,  free  Italy  might  be  begun. 

In  Bohemia  a  strong  nationalist  movement  had  long 
been  developing.  Since  1526  she  had  been  united  with 
Austria  by  personal  imion,  the  emperor  being  king  of 
Bohemia.    In  course  of  time,  a  German  minority  of  the 


AUSTRIA,   GERMANY,  PRUSSIA     231 


population  had  become  the  upper  class,  in  possession  of 
much  of  the  power  and  the  wealth  of  the  country.  But 
always  the  great  majority  of  the  people  were  the  Czechs, 
with  their  own  Slavic  language.  During  the  nineteenth 
century  there  took  place  in  Bohemia  what  had  occurred 
in  Greece  and  afterward  in  Hungary,  and  what  was  later 
on  to  be  so  prominent  in  Ireland,  a  consistent  effort  to 
revive  nationality,  and  especially  use  of  the  language  and 
a  love  for  the  old  literature  and  traditions.  In  June,  1848, 
a  congress  of  many  of  the  Slavic  peoples  was  held  at  the 
capital,  Prague.  The  leaders  were  dreaming  of  a  day  when 
their  peoples  would  have  freedom  and  independence,  and 
perhaps  enter  into  a  great  Slavic  union  for  their  mutual 
advantage.  But  they  found  now  that  there  was  no  Slavic 
language  which  all  the  delegates  could  understand,  and 
German  was  used  at  the  Congress.  Almost  immediately 
the  old  and  deep-seated  antagonism  between  Teutons  and 
Slavs  was  aroused.  At  first  the  Bohemians  protested 
loyalty  to  the  Austrian  government.  Presently  they 
proclaimed  independence. 

In  Hungary  meanwhile  a  more  important  nationalist 
movement  had  taken  place.  When  the  power  of  the 
Hungarians  had  been  broken  in  1526  by  the  Turks  at  the 
battle  of  Mohacs,  part  of  the  country  had  passed  under 
Turkish  dominion,  but  the  remainder  had  been  united 
in  personal  union  with  Austria.  Since  that  time,  all  of 
Hungary,  along  with  other  dependent  lands,  had  been 
reconquered  from  the  Turks  by  the  emperor,  who  was 
king  of  the  Hungarian  lands.  In  Hungary  the  most  im- 
portant element  of  the  population  was  the  Hungarians 
or  Magyars,  but  they  were  exceeded  in  numbers  by 
Rumanians  and  Slavs,  just  as  the  Germans  of  Austria 
were  outnumbered  by  South  Slavs,  Czechs,  and  Poles. 
Croatia  and  Transylvania  had  some  measure  of  autonomy, 
but  ever  since  the  Magyars  had  come  into  this  region 
a  thousand  years  before  they  had  acted  as  superiors  and 


In 
Himgary 


232 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


masters.  Yet  the  mass  of  the  Hungarian  people  were  in 
as  lowly  condition  as  the  other  races  about  them.  Hungary 
had  an  old  constitution,  according  to  which  the  power 
of  the  nobles  was  supreme.  The  greater  nobles  sat  in  the 
Diet,  and  had  nearly  all  the  political  power.  There  were 
some  five  hundred  of  these  magnates  or  great  men,  but 
there  were  in  addition  about  seven  hundred  thousand 
petty  nobles,  unimportant  in  the  government,  but  raised 
far  above  the  mass  of  the  people.  The  nobles  paid  no 
taxes.  They  were  supported  by  the  labor  of  peasants, 
the  great  mass  of  the  people,  who  continued  in  the  lowliest 
serfdom,  for  Hungary  was  still  a  land  of  manorial,  feudal, 
medieval  customs.  During  Metternich's  time  the  pro- 
gress of  western  Europe  had  hardly  reached  into  the 
country,  though  in  recent  years  there  had  been  some  who 
had  foreseen  a  change  and  tried  to  bring  it  about.  Count 
Szechenyi,  one  of  the  most  prominent  of  the  magnates, 
endeavored  to  effect  economic  improvement;  Louis 
Kossuth  and  Francis  Deak  labored  for  political  reform. 
In  1847  their  party  had  demanded  liberty  of  the  press, 
taxation  of  the  nobles,  and  other  changes.  Along  with 
this  was  going  forward  a  nationalist  awakening  like  that 
which  had  been  developing  in  Bohemia.  Hungarian 
leaders  desired  not  merely  reform,  but  a  Hungary  in  which 
the  Magyar  people  and  language  should  completely  pre- 
vail. In  1844  they  had  succeeded  in  getting  their  tongue 
declared  the  language  of  the  government  instead  of  Latin, 
though  this  was  opposed  by  the  Slavic  peoples. 

Such  was  the  condition  of  affairs  when  news  came  of 
the  Revolution  in  France  and  the  outbreak  in  Vienna. 
At  once  the  effect  was  felt  in  Hungary,  and  in  the  midst 
of  enormous  enthusiasm  and  excitement  the  Hungarian 
Diet  passed  the  March  Laws,  which  were  reforms  like 
those  made  in  1789  by  the  National  Assembly  in  France. 
Serfdom  and  manorial  dues  were  at  last  abolished,  and 
the  nobles  deprived  of  their  monopoly  of  political  offices 


^ 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA 


and  power.  The  Diet  was  thereafter  to  be  elected  by 
Hungarians  owning  a  stipulated  amount  of  property. 
Freedom  of  the  press,  trial  by  jury,  and  religious  freedom 
were  also  proclaimed.  Furthermore,  Hungary  was  now 
to  have  its  own  ministry  and  its  own  separate  govern- 
ment, remaining  connected  with  Austria  only  through  the 
person  of  their  common  monarch. 

As  a  result  of  all  these  movements  Austria's  power 
seemed  for  the  moment  to  be  gone.  Austria  proper,  the 
center  of  Hapsburg  power,  was  torn  by  revolution,  and 
the  dependencies  and  outlying  possessions,  Italy,  Bohemia, 
Hungary,  had  effected  virtual  separation.  But  now  was 
witnessed  a  phenomenon,  frequently  seen  again  with  sur- 
prise in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century.  Down 
to  the  very  beginning  of  the  Great  War  outsiders  often 
predicted  the  breaking  up  of  the  Hapsburg  dominions. 
But  they  usually  forgot  that  the  Hapsburg  power  had 
developed  because  it  held  together  diverse  elements  not 
strong  enough  to  stand  alone,  and  generally  too  jealous 
of  one  another  and  too  different  to  unite  in  any  other  com- 
bination. Because  of  these  factors  Austria-Hungary 
remained  one  of  the  great  powers  of  Europe  long  after 
the  middle  of  the  century,  and,  indeed,  seemed  to  grow 
stronger  with  time.  Now  after  1848  it  was  the  jealousies 
of  the  different  parts  and  the  incompatibility  of  the  racial 
elements  that  made  it  possible  for  Austria  to  recover. 

In  Italy,  indeed,  her  power  was  only  shaken  a  little. 
The  aged  but  able  veteran  Radetzky,  driven  out  of  Milan, 
retired  merely  to  the  position  of  the  Quadrilateral,  the 
four  strong  fortresses  of  the  north,  and  shortly  after  re- 
established Austrian  authority  as  a  result  of  his  victory  at 
Custozza.  Almost  at  the  same  time  an  Austrian  army 
under  Prince  Windischgratz  reconquered  Bohemia  where 
the  Germans  and  the  conservatives  had  arrayed  them- 
selves against  the  Czechs,  the  mass  of  the  people.  The 
forces  of  reaction  were  rapidly  getting  new  strength.   The 


The  power 
of  Austria 
revives 


The  Italians 
defeated 


The 

Bohemians 

reconquered 


234 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Austrian  Slavs,  now  rendered  submissive,  were  used  by 
the  government  to  help  in  defeating  the  German  insur- 
gents in  Austria.  Racial  jealousies  were  aroused,  and 
dislike  and  suspicion  fostered.  July  22nd,  a  Constituent 
Diet  for  Austria  assembled  at  Vienna.  The  gathering 
was  torn  by  racial  dissensions  between  Germans  and 
Slavs,  and  made  no  important  reform  except  the  abolition 
of  serfdom.  Soon  the  democrats  and  liberals  became 
alarmed  at  the  signs  of  growing  reaction;  a  new  insurrec- 
tion broke  out;  and  the  emperor,  who  had  returned  to  the 
capital,  again  fled.  But  Windischgratz  now  marched  on 
Vienna;  it  was  soon  invested  and  captured;  and  by  the 
end  of  October  the  power  of  the  government  was  very 
largely  restored  in  Austria.  It  was  at  this  point,  indeed, 
that  Austria  began  effective  resistance  to  the  Parliament 
of  Frankfort.  Reaction  now  held  full  sway.  March  4, 
1849,  a  new  constitution  was  granted  by  imperial  author- 
ity, which  proclaimed  the  unity  of  the  Austrian  dominions 
and  organized  them  under  central  bureaucratic  rule. 

Only  the  Hungarians  remained  to  be  dealt  with.  By 
this  time  they  had  virtually  established  their  indepen- 
dence, and  their  position  seemed  strong,  but  actually 
they  were  near  to  their  fall.  The  Magyars  did,  indeed, 
want  reform  and  liberal  change,  but  they  also  wanted  to 
preserve  their  own  supremacy,  and  to  make  Magyar  things 
everywhere  supreme  in  the  state.  In  this  they  were 
opposed  by  the  Slavic  and  German  and  Rumanian  popula- 
tions who  were  unwilling  to  abandon  their  own  nationalist 
aspirations.  The  Hungarians  were  less  than  half  of  the 
population  of  Hungary,  and  were  only  one  among  the 
seven  peoples  who  inhabited  it;  but  they  were  now  de- 
termined that  the  Magyar  tongue  should  be  the  language 
of  the  government  in  all  parts,  and,  as  far  as  possible,  that 
the  non-Magyar  parts  of  the  population  should  be  slowly 
fused  into  the  Hungarian  race.  But  the  Slovaks,  the 
Croatians,  and  also  the  Rumanians  of  Transylvania,  were 


AUSTRIA,   GERMANY,  PRUSSIA    235 


strongly  opposed  to  any  attempt  to  incorporate  them  in  a 
unified  Hungarian  state.  As  the  Magyars  themselves 
wanted  complete  autonomy  if  they  were  to  remain  con- 
nected with  Austria,  so  the  Rumanians  and  Slavs  of 
Hungary  wanted  some  measure  of  autonomy  for  them- 
selves, and  this  the  Hungarians  were  unwilling  to  grant. 
Kossuth  told  the  South  Slavs  that  before  there  could  be 
any  equality  of  the  Slavonian  tongue  with  the  Magyar, 
appeal  must  be  made  to  the  sword.  The  result  was  that 
almost  from  the  first  the  majority  of  the  people  in  Hungary 
were  against  the  revolutionary  party. 

Of  this  situation  the  Austrian  authorities  took  easy 
advantage.  The  South  Slavs  tried  to  set  up  a  kingdom, 
separate  from  Hungary  and  under  Hapsburg  rule,  and 
presently  the  inhabitants  of  Transylvania  also  tried  to 
separate  themselves.  For  a  time  Austria  waited,  but  as 
she  recovered  her  strength  she  encouraged  Jellacic,  ban  or 
viceroy  of  Croatia,  to  invade  Hungary,  and  in  January, 
1849,  Windischgratz  took  Budapest.  Just  when  the 
cause  of  the  Hungarians  seemed  desperate,  however,  they 
rallied  and  regained  almost  all  they  had  lost.  But  in 
April,  at  this  last  moment  of  their  triumph,  they  separated 
completely  from  Austria  and  proclaimed  a  Hungarian 
republic.  This  was  a  fatal  step,  for  at  once  it  brought 
Russia  into  the  confiict.  Now  when  the  Austrians  and 
the  Croatians  advanced  from  the  west,  the  Russians 
entered  the  country  through  the  passes  of  the  Carpathian 
mountains,  and,  overwhelmed  on  all  sides,  the  Hungarian 
republic  collapsed.  Austria,  triumphant,  took  savage 
vengeance.  The  leaders,  who  had  not  escaped,  were  put 
to  death  or  cast  into  prison;  Hungary's  autonomy  was 
suppressed  and  her  constitution  annulled;  the  country 
was  divided  into  provinces,  and  in  all  of  them  German 
was  made  the  language  of  the  state  instead  of  Magyar. 
Of  the  Hungarian  movement  all  that  remained  was  the 
social  reforms;  feudalism  and  serfdom  had  disappeared. 


Hungary 
at  bay 


The 

Magyars 
over- 
whelmed 


236 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Just  before  the  Frankfort  Assembly  melted  away, 
German  radicals,  disgusted  with  its  failure,  had  tried  to 
set  up  republics  in  some  of  the  German  states,  like  the 
one  just  established  in  Hungary,  but  these  republics  did 
not  last  beyond  the  spring  and  summer  of  1849.  In 
central  Europe  the  revolutionary  movement  for  the  pre- 
sent had  spent  its  force. 

The  restoration  of  Germany  was  now  attempted;  first 
by  Prussia,  and  then  by  Austria.  The  Prussian  plan  was 
to  establish  a  German  union  from  which  Austria  would 
be  excluded,  with  a  government,  much  like  what  was 
afterward  adopted,  in  which  Prussia  should  have  the 
leading  part.  The  Austrian  leaders  proposed  to  revive 
the  Germanic  Confederation,  in  which  now  all  of  the 
Austrian  dominions  were  to  be  included.  Prussia  did 
attempt  to  establish  a  union,  in  which  the  smaller  states 
entered,  along  with  Saxony  and  Hanover,  though  these 
two  states  almost  at  once  tried  to  withdraw.  Austria 
began  to  establish  a  revived  Confederation.  Thus  Ger- 
many was  divided.  Soon  the  matter  came  to  issue  over  a 
dispute  about  Hesse-Cassel.  Then  Austria  and  the  south 
German  states  put  into  the  field  an  army  of  200,000  men 
against  Prussia,  who  was  not  prepared  to  make  effective 
resistance.  In  November,  1S50,  by  the  Convention  of 
Olmutz,  Prussia  yielded.  Then  the  Germanic  Confedera- 
tion was  revived;  and  Austria  was  once  more,  as  previ- 
ously, the  leader  among  t)#e  German  states. 

For  a  few  years  more  the  ascendancy  of  Austria  con- 
tinued, but  it  is  evident  now  that  forces  had  long  been 
silently  at  work  which  had  brought  about  a  great  altera- 
tion. Ever  since  1815  Prussia,  despite  reactionary 
politicians  and  weak  kings,  had  been  developing  into  the 
strongest  state  in  central  Europe.  The  leadership  of 
Austria,  which  had  come  down  from  olden  times,  had  been 
owing  to  the  fact  that  she  was  the  most  powerful  state  in 
the  old  empire,  and  hence  it  had  seemed  very  natural  for 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA    237 


her  to  be  predominant  in  the  Confederation.  In  older 
times  south  Germany  and  the  lands  in  the  Danube  valley 
were  more  favored  than  the  countries  in  the  north.  In 
Prussia  and  along  the  Baltic  and  the  North  seas  the  lands 
were  poor  and  barren,  but  in  the  south  agriculture  flour- 
ished wherever  it  was  developed.  Moreover,  in  earlier 
times  south  Germany  was  the  center  of  German  commerce 
and  industry  and  many  of  the  trade  routes  led  to  the 
Mediterranean  or  down  the  Danube  through  Austrian 
lands.  But  gradually  as  time  went  on  the  great  trade 
routes  of  Europe  were  in  the  north  instead  of  the  south, 
and  presently  Prussia  and  the  north  German  lands  lay 
not  only  along  one  line  of  communication  from  Russia 
to  western  Europe  but  across  the  routes  from  the  south 
German  lands  out  on  to  the  Baltic  and  the  North  seas 
and  thence  to  the  Atlantic;  and  Austria  and  the  south 
fell  behind.  Meanwhile  Prussia  had  been  carefully 
developed  by  a  dynasty  of  sovereigns  who  built  up  Prus- 
sian power  by  their  armies,  it  is  true,  but  who  also  fostered 
commerce  and  industry  to  the  utmost.  Then  in  1815 
the  Congress  of  Vienna  had  added  greatly  to  Prussia's 
territory,  giving  her  not  only  part  of  Saxony  but  also  the 
Rhine  lands  to  defend  against  France.  She  had  now, 
after  Austria,  by  far  the  largest  population  and  territory 
of  any  state  in  the  Confederation,  and,  since  Austrian 
possessions  were  mostly  non-Germanic,  she  appeared  in- 
creasingly the  natural  leader  of  the  German  peoples. 

During  the  period  of  subjection  to  France,  the  great 
minister  von  Stein  had  worked  to  make  the  land  strong 
and  prosperous  so  that  the  people  might  escape  from  the 
yoke  of  Napoleon.  In  1807  serfdom  was  abolished,  forty 
years  before  it  was  done  in  Austria;  trade  in  land  between 
the  classes  was  permitted;  occupations  were  thrown  open 
to  members  of  all  classes;  and  trade  barriers  between 
country  and  town  were  removed.  Previous  to  this  time 
commerce  had  been  fatally  hampered  by  payments  which 


Austria 
falls  behind 


Reforms  in 
Prussia 


^8 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


had  to  be  made  on  goods  taken  through  the  German  towns. 
Customs  duties  were,  however,  still  levied  at  the  frontier, 
and  each  of  the  states  into  which  Germany  remained 
divided  after  1815  levied  its  own  customs,  the  multiplicity 
and  number  of  them  greatly  hindering  German  commerce. 
A  great  step  forward  was  taken  when  in  1818  Prussia 
established  a  uniform  rate  for  all  parts  of  her  widely  scat- 
tered domain,  with  freedom  of  trade  between  all  of  these 
several  parts  and  then  invited  other  states  near  by  to 
enter  into  the  same  regulations  with  her.  The  project 
of  a  customs  union,  or  Zollverein,  was  an  old  one  in  Ger- 
many, and  long  before,  clear  thinkers  had  seen  the  ad- 
vantage which  would  come  to  German  commerce  and  also 
to  the  German  people  if  such  commercial  unity  were 
brought  about.  Great  difficulties  and  local  particular 
interests  stood  in  the  way,  but  gradually  Prussia  won 
over  some  of  the  other  states  to  join  her.  In  the  process 
of  forming  a  Zollverein  she  was  greatly  favored  by  her 
geographical  position.  As  she  won  some  of  her  neighbors 
to  join  her,  others,  like  Saxony,  presently  found  them- 
selves cut  off  from  easy  access  to  the  great  trade  routes 
and  at  such  a  disadvantage  in  commerce  that  presently 
they  were  compelled  through  self-interest  also  to  join. 
In  1834  the  Zollverein  was  established  between  Prussia, 
Saxony,  Bavaria,  and  fourteen  of  the  lesser  states;  and  by 
1842  the  only  important  states  remaining  out  were  Han- . 
over  and  Austria. 

Thus,  as  the  result 'of  the  working  of  economic  forces, 
nearly  all  the  German  states  were  brought  together  in  a 
commercial  union,  while  Austria  was  left  completely  out- 
side. It  might  Very  well  seem  to  those  who  judged  cir- 
cumstances from  politics  and  diplomatic  relations  that 
Austria  was  the  leader  of  the  German  states  bound  to- 
gether only  in  the  loose  Germanic  Confederation  ruled 
by  the  ineffective  Diet  at  Frankfort;  and  as  late  as  1850, 
when  Prussia  yielded  so  completely  at  Olmutz,  Austria's 


239 


240 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

economic 
unification 
of  Germany 


position  might  seem  unimpaired.  But  the  shadow  not 
the  substance  of  her  former  power  among  the  German 
states  remained ;  and  what  she  still  had  she  would  presently 
be  able  to  keep  only  through  upholding  it  by  force.  More 
and  more  did  north  Germany  and  Austria  draw  farther 
apart  in  interests  and  importance.  The  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion came  into  central  Europe  at  the  time  that  Prussia  was 
establishing  the  customs  union,  and  developed  in  Prussia 
and  the  neighboring  states  far  more  greatly  than  in  Aus- 
tria and  the  lands  of  the  south.  The  abolition  of  customs 
barriers  fostered  trade  and  industry  greatly,  and  presently 
the  countries  of  the  Zollverein  entered  upon  a  splendid 
period  of  prosperity  and  economic  advancement. 

The  significance  of  this  work  was  afterward  obscured 
by  the  apparent  splendor  and  the  success  of  the  military 
achievements  by  which  the  political  unification  of  Ger- 
many was  brought  about  when  the  German  Empire  was 
established.  But  looking  back  now  with  altered  perspective, 
it  seems  that  it  would  have  been  better  for  Germany  and 
the  rest  of  Europe  had  it  not  been  necessary  for  the  work 
of  Bismarck  and  his  companions  to  be  done,  for  it  is 
evident  now  that  while  it  was  through  their  successes  that 
German  unity  was  really  achieved,  yet  the  foundations 
were  laid  and  the  more  important  part  of  the  task  accom- 
plished through  the  constructive  and  peaceful  work  of 
Prussian  statesmen  who  established  the  Zollverein  and  with 
it  the  real  beginning  of  German  federation.  Unfortun- 
ately, by  the  middle  of  the  century  it  began  to  seem  that 
they  would  not  be  able  to  finish  the  work  of  peacefully 
drawing  together  the  Germans  in  one  great  nation. 
Then  the  task  of  unification  was  taken  up  by  Bismarck, 
and  by  force,  by  strength,  by  military  might  suddenly 
and  magnificently  completed.  But  what  Bismarck  and 
von  Moltke  did  has  since  been  undone;  while  what  re- 
mains of  Germany  now  and  gives  hope  to  the  German 
people  for  the  future  is  the  work  which  was  peacefully 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA    241 


wrought  out  in  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

In  the  years  which  followed  OlmUtz  the  affairs  of  Prussia 
came  into  the  keeping  of  leaders  who  resolved  to  increase 
the  military  power  of  their  country  so  greatly  that  they 
might  later  on  give  Austria  defiance.  In  spite  of  all  the 
commercial  and  industrial  progress  which  Prussia  had 
made,  she  remained  politically  far  behind  England  and 
France,  and  even  when  a  constitution  was  granted  in  1850 
the  government  continued  to  be  controlled  entirely  by  the 
king  and  by  the  aristocracy  and  nobles.  For  generations 
the  instinct  of  these  men  had  been  warlike;  their  fathers 
before  them  had  won  their  possessions  by  the  sword  and 
kept  them  by  strength  and  by  force.  Much  of  the  power 
of  Prussia  had  come  from  the  armies  which  former  rulers 
had  built  up,  and  from  the  victories  won  by  Frederick  the 
Great.  To  the  Prussian  upper  class  force  and  power 
seemed  the  means  of  successful  government  and  advance- 
ment. In  1857  the  brilliant  but  erratic  and  weak  Frederick 
William  IV,  being  afflicted  with  a  mental  disease,  the 
administration  of  Prussia  was  put  into  the  hands  of  his 
brother  William  as  regent,  who,  four  years  later,  in  1861, 
ascended  the  throne  as  William  I  (1861-1888).  The  new 
sovereign  was  a  soldier  by  long  training,  and  he  resolved 
at  once  to  increase  the  Prussian  army.  For  this  it  was 
necessary  to  have  additional  revenue,  which  must  be  got 
from  the  Prussian  parliament.  But  in  the  Landtag  the 
liberals  were  in  control  and  they  looked  with  disfavor  on 
increasing  the  army.  In  1862,  by  a  great  majority,  they 
refused  the  money  which  the  king  required.  In  the  bitter 
disappointment  of  this  moment,  William  was  prepared 
to  abdicate  his  crown,  but  as  a  last  resort  beforehand  he 
entrusted  the  administration  of  affairs  to  one  who  was 
destined  now  to  guide  Prussia  through  the  greatest  period 
of  her  career  and  profoundly  alter  the  history  of  Germany 
and  of  Europe.     Thi^  was  Count  Otto  von  Bismarck. 

Bismarck  (1815-1898),  was  a  Prussian  Junker  or  nohle- 


The  new 
leaders  of 
Prussia 


William  I 


Bismarck 


242 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


His 
ambition 


Bismarck 
and  the 
Prussian 
representa- 
tives    . 


man  who  had  already  gained  some  notoriety  as  a  reac- 
tionary in  the  lower  chamber  of  the  Prussian  Landtag.  He 
had  served  as  Prussian  representative  at  the  Frankfort 
Diet,  where  he  had  stanchly  upheld  the  dignity  of  his 
country;  then,  as  ambassador  to  Russia  and,  for  a  few 
months  in  1862,  as  ambassador  to  France,  gaining  in- 
valuable experience  in  diplomatic  affairs  and  much  knowl- 
edge of  the  politics  of  Europe.  His  political  tastes  and 
instincts  were  thoroughly  those  of  the  conservatives  and 
the  nobility  of  central  Europe.  He  had  no  patience  with 
parliaments,  and  scant  respect  for  representatives  of  the 
people.  In  his  mind  the  king  ruled  by  divine  right,  as 
the  Prussian  Constitution  declared.  His  principal  desire 
was  to  uphold  the  power  of  his  sovereign  and  his  class,  to 
increase  the  strength  of  Prussia,  and  effect  the  unification 
of  Germany  by  grouping  the  other  German  states  in  union 
about  Prussia.  He  was  a  thorough  patriot  and  his 
motives,  from  his  own  point  of  view,  were  the  highest 
and  the  best.  He  had  great  strength  of  character,  iron 
resolution,  dauntless  courage,  and  the  highest  ability  in 
conducting  diplomacy  and  foreign  relations.  There  was 
no  one  who  dealt  with  him  whom  he  did  not  overreach  in 
the  end.  All  the  tasks  he  set  out  to  accomplish  he  suc- 
ceeded in  effecting  as  he  desired,  and  all  that  he  gained 
for  Prussia  and  Germany  he  kept  as  long  as  he  remained 
in  power.  His  success,  indeed,  was  so  immense  that  for 
a  long  time  contemporaries  and  those  who  followed  after 
him  believed  that  he  had  been  the  greatest  statesman  of 
his  century  and  the  greatest  one  his  country  had  ever 
produced.  But  afterward  it  was  seen  more  clearly  that 
some  of  his  work  was  not  based  upon  the  moral  foun- 
dations which  give  worth  and  permanence  to  achievement. 
Bismarck  at  once  warned  the  lower  chamber  not  to 
rely  too  much  upon  its  power.  When  it  persisted  in  its 
refusal  to  grant  the  money,  he  boldly  continued  for  1863 
the  appropriation  which  had  been  passed  the  year  pre- 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA    243 


ceding.  Then  the  chamber  asked  the  king  to  dismiss 
him,  but  the  monarch  supported  his  minister,  prorogued 
the  Diet,  and  announced  a  strict  censorship  of  the  press. 
The  Prussians,  who  had  not  behind  them  a  long  history 
of  constitutional  progress,  and  most  of  whom  as  yet  cared 
little  for  representative  government,  made  no  strong 
protest,  and  such  discontent  as  there  was  soon  diminished 
in  the  midst  of  the  great  economic  prosperity  through 
which  the  country  was  passing.  So,  reorganization  and 
strengthening  of  the  army  went  forward  until  Prussia 
was  by  far  the  strongest  military  power  in  Europe,  Mean- 
while, with  the  greatest  skill,  Bismarck  so  conducted 
Prussia's  foreign  affairs  as  to  make  it  certain  that  when 
the  day  came  of  contest  with  Austria,  she  would  not  be 
assisted  by  some  other  great  power.  After  the  brief  war 
of  1864 — in  which  Prussia  and  Austria  together  overcame 
Denmark — Austria  and  Prussia  drifted  steadily  apart,  as 
Bismarck  so  managed  things  as  to  make  a  contest  between 
them  inevitable.  In  1866  the  struggle  came,  and  then,  to 
the  astonishment  of  the  world,  the  Prussian  army  laid 
prostrate  the  power  of  Austria  in  the  brief  Seven  Weeks* 
War.  The  king  and  some  of  the  Prussian  leaders  wished 
to  continue  the  war  and  take  away  from  Austria  a  part  of 
her  territory,  but  Bismarck  opposed  them,  for  he  desired 
only  to  thrust  Austria  outside  of  German  affairs,  to  make  a 
united  Germany  under  Prussia's  leadership,  and  hoped 
when  this  was  accomplished  to  have  Austria's  friendship. 
By  the  Treaty  of  Prague  much  of  the  work  which  had  so 
long  been  going  forward  in  central  Europe  was  now  for- 
mally completed.  Austria,  paying  to  Prussia  a  small 
indemnity,  but  losing  no  territory  except  Venetia — which 
she  ceded  to  Prussia's  ally,  the  Italian  kingdom — withdrew 
now  from  any  part  in  German  affairs;  the  old  Germanic 
Confederation  was  dissolved;  and  Prussia  prepared  to 
establish  a  new  confederation  of  the  north  German 
states. 


Prussia's 
army 
strength- 
ened 


Austria 
overthrows 


244 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  North 
Gennan 
Confedera- 
Hon,  1867 


Govern- 
ment 


The  German 
Empire 
established, 
1871 


When  the  war  began  every  German  state  of  any  im- 
portance had  ranged  itself  on  Austria's  side.  Now  all 
of  them  were  conquered.  From  the  south  German  states 
little  was  taken,  but  elsewhere  Prussia  did  her  will.  She 
annexed  Schleswig-Holstein,  the  subject  of  the  dispute 
with  Austria,  all  of  the  kingdom  of  Hanover,  the  duchies 
of  Hesse-Cassel  and  Nassau,  and  also  the  free  city  of 
Frankfort.  Thus  was  her  territory  rounded  out,  and  her 
population  increased  by  four  millions  and  a  half.  She 
then  formed  the  North  German  Confederation,  a  strong 
federal  union  of  all  the  German  states  north  of  the  river 
Main.  Local  affairs  were  to  be  regulated  by  the  members, 
but  there  was  now  also  a  strong  central  government.  In 
this  central  government  the  executive,  an  hereditary  pres- 
ident, was  the  Prussian  king,  who  commanded  the  armed 
forces  of  the  union  and  managed  its  foreign  affairs.  There 
was  also  to  be  a  Bundesraih,  or  federal  council,  made  up 
of  representatives  of  the  governments  of  the  various  mem- 
ber states,  and  a  parliamentary  assembly,  Reichstag,  of 
which  the  members  were  to  be  elected  by  manhood 
suffrage. 

What  remained  to  be  done  was  soon  accomplished.  The 
states  south  of  the  Main — Bavaria,  WUrtemberg,  part  of 
Hesse-Darmstadt,  and  Baden — feared  France,  and  con- 
sidered themselves  too  weak  to  stand  alone.  Accordingly 
they  formed  an  offensive  and  defensive  alliance  with 
Prussia.  Bismarck  believed  that  France  would  not  will- 
ingly acquiesce  in  the  creation  of  such  a  great  new  state 
on  her  border,  and  he  saw  clearly  that  triumph  over  France 
would  create  such  enthusiasm  everywhere  among  Ger- 
mans that  most  probably  the  south  German  states  would 
enter  the  imion  also.  Therefore  he  skilfully  led  France 
on,  as  he  had  done  with  Austria,  assisted  however  in  this 
case  by  a  rash  and  foolish  war  party  in  Paris.  In  1870-71 
France  was  completely  crushed  on  the  battlefield.  Then 
amidst  immense  enthusiasm  a  German  empire,  including 


AUSTRIA,   GERMANY,  PRUSSIA     245 


all  the  German  states,  south  as  well  as  north  of  the  Main, 
was  proclaimed,  with  a  constitution  much  like  that  which 
the  North  German  Confederation  had  possessed.  To 
this  new  empire  France  was  compelled  to  cede  Alsace- 
Lorraine.  In  their  rejoicing  Germans  thought  of  Bis- 
marck as  the  unifier  of  their  country  after  leaders  had  failed 
during  a  thousand  years  before  his  time. 

Austria  meanwhile  had  gone  forward  on  her  separate 
way.  No  longer  absorbed  in  keeping  her  leadership 
of  the  German  states,  she  turned  to  consider  her  domestic 
problems.  In  1851,  after  the  Magyars  and  the  Slavs 
were  reduced,  she  had  entered  upon  a  course  of  absolutism 
and  reaction.  The  constitution  which  had  been  granted 
in  1849  was  annulled;  there  was  henceforth  no  constitu- 
tional government  whatever;  and  in  Austria,  as  in  Russia, 
the  will  of  the  prince  was  law.  The  government,  however, 
did  go  forward  vigorously  with  reforms  at  the  same  time 
that  it  tried  to  Germanize  all  the  various  elements  of  the 
population. 

Had  Austria  continued  to  be  successful  in  her  foreign 
relations,  she  might  have  continued  to  rule  despotically 
and  try  to  Germanize  all  of  her  subjects,  but  soon  began  a 
period  of  great  disasters.  The  Italians,  striving  to  win 
freedom  and  unity,  got  the  assistance  of  France,  and  in 
1859  the  Austrians  were  defeated,  and  forced  to  surrender 
a  part  of  their  Italian  possessions.  Austria  weakened, 
now  felt  it  necessary  to  make  concessions,  and  the  period 
of  reaction  ended  in  the  following  year.  The  liberals, 
who  were  influencing  the  government's  course,  hoped  to 
preserve  a  unified  state,  and  advocated  a  parliament  in 
which  all  the  races  of  the  empire  would  have  part.  But 
national  divisions  were  too  strong  for  this,  and  neither 
Hungarians  nor  Slavs  were  willing  to  be  merged  even  in  a 
liberal  Germanized  empire.  The  Hungarians,  who  were 
the  strongest  of  the  dissenters,  now  got  back  again  the 
status  which  their  country  had  had  before  the  Revolution 


Austria 
outside  of 
Germany 


A  period 
of  disaster 


Unwilling 
subjects 


246 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Francis 
Defik 


The  Dual 
Monarchy 


Success 
of  the 
Ausgleich 


of  1848.  But  they  were  in  no  wise  satisfied  with  this,  and 
demanded  the  restoration  of  the  March  Laws,  which  had 
given  them  greater  independence.  Then  Hungary  was 
again  made  a  province  of  the  empire,  and  allowed  to  send 
representatives  to  its  Diet. 

The  Hungarians  refused  to  accept  this  position  and 
began  a  vigorous  opposition.  Their  leader  now  was 
Francis  Deak,  noble  in  character  and  wise  and  construc- 
tive as  a  leader.  Patiently  he  tried  to  attain  his  ends  by 
constitutional  means,  declaring  that  he  did  not  wish  to 
separate  Hungary  from  Austria  and  break  up  the  empire. 
His  opportunity  came  when  Austria  was  overthrown  in 
1866  in  the  Austro-Prussian  War.  The  Hungarians  had 
stood  aloof  while  the  Prussians  gained  their  victories,  and 
it  was  feared  that  they  might  now  break  away  in  complete 
independence.  The  result  was  that  Austria  readily  yielded 
what  Deak  had  been  striving  to  obtain.  In  1867  an 
arrangement  was  made  known  as  the  Ausgleich  or  com- 
promise, by  which  the  relations  between  Austria  and  Hun- 
gary were  regulated,  and  the  Dual  Monarchy  of  Austria- 
Hungary  established.  By  this  arrangement  Hungary  was 
put  on  a  footing  of  complete  equality  with  Austria,  and 
given  entire  control  over  her  internal  affairs,  as  had  been  the 
case  under  the  March  Laws.  There  were  now  two  states, 
each  with  its  own  ministry,  its  own  parliament,  and  its 
own  oflBcials.  They  were  to  have  one  flag  and  a  single 
ruler,  who  was  to  be  Emperor  of  Austria  and  King  of 
Hungary.  They  were  also  to  be  united  with  respect  to 
affairs  concerning  them  jointly,  such  as  war,  finance,  and 
foreign  affairs,  by  a  joint  ministry  of  three  parts,  these 
ministries  to  be  supervised  by  "delegations,"  or  committees 
of  the  two  parliaments,  meeting  together  alternately  in 
Vienna  and  Buda-Pest. 

This  remarkable  system  of  dual  government,  which 
seemed  strange  enough  to  peoples  more  uniform  and 
united,  lasted  successfully  for  half  a  century,  and  was  not 


m 


AUSTRIA,  GERMANY,  PRUSSIA    247 

destroyed  until  the  Great  War  broke  it  to  pieces.  It  was, 
indeed,  a  very  successful  solution  of  the  diflScult  problem 
of  holding  together  under  one  government  two  peoples  not 
alike  enough  to  unite  completely,  and  not  strong  enough 
to  go  their  own  separate  ways.  Its  greatest  defect,  as  was 
afterward  clearly  seen,  was  that  it  erected  a  system  of 
dualism  in  an  empire  where  there  were  three  important 
races,  not  two.  Hungarians  and  Germans  were  now 
contented,  but  the  more  numerous  Slavs  were  not.  In- 
deed, the  Ausgleich  was  an  arrangement  whereby  a 
minority,  the  Germans,  in  Austria,  allied  themselves  with 
a  minority,  the  Hungarians,  in  Hungary  to  hold  down  in 
subjection  the  more  numerous  Slavs  whom  they  ruled. 
And  in  after  years  it  was  to  be  seen  that  the  Slovaks,  the 
Jugo-Slavs,  and  the  Rumanians  were  just  as  discontented 
with  the  Dual  Monarchy  as  ever  the  Magyars  had  been 
before  the  Ausgleich  was  granted.  , 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General:  for  an  introduction — W.  H.  Dawson,  The  German 
Empire:  1867-19U,  2  vols.  (1919);  Sir  A.  W.  Ward,  Germany, 
1815-1890,  3  vols.  (1916-19).  Ernst  Berner,  Geschichte  des 
Preussischen  Staates,  (2d  ed.  1896);  K.  T.  von  Heigel,  Deutsche 
Geschichte  vom  Tode  Friedrichs  des  Grossen  his  zur  Auflosung 
des  Alien  ReicheSy  2  vols.  (1899-1911);  P.  M.  Leger,  Histoire  de 
rAvMriche-Hongrie,  depuis  les  Origines  jusqua  VAnnSe  1878 
(1879),  English  trans,  by  Mrs.  B.  Hill  (1889) ;  Heinrich  von 
Treitschke,  Deutsche  Geschichte  im  Neunzehnten  Jahrhunderty 
5  vols.  (3d  ed.  1895),  from  the  period  of  the  French  Revolution, 
brilliantly  written,  strongly  nationalist,  hostile  to  the  liberals, 
English  trans,  by  E.  and  C.  Paul,  volumes  I-VII  (1915-19); 
H.  von  Zwiedineck-Siidenhorst,  Deutsche  Geschichte  von  der 
Auflosung  des  Alien  bis  zur  Errichtung  des  Neuen  Kaiserreiches 
(1806-1871)y  3  vols.  (1897-1905). 

Biographies:  Charles  de  Mazade,  Un  Chancelier  de  VAnden 
RSgime:  le  Regne  Diplomatique  de  M.  de  Metternich  (1889); 
J.  R.  Seeley,  Life  and  Times  of  StetUy  2  vols.  (1879.) 

Particular  periods:  G.  P.  (xooch,  Germany  and  the  French 


«4S  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

Revolution  (1920);  J.  von  Pflug-Hartung,  editor,  Das  Befreiungs- 
jahr,  1813  (1913),  oflficial  documents;  H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  Studies 
in  Napoleonic  Statesmanship:  Germany  (1903),  brilliant  and 
admirable. 

The  Revolution  of  1848:  Hans  Blum,  Die  Deutsche  Revolution, 
18^8-1849  (1897),  best  study  of,  in  German;  Karl  Marx,  Revolu- 
tion and  Counter-Revolution^  or  Germany  in  184^,  ed.  by 
Eleanor  Marx  Aveling  (1896),  consisting  of  articles  written  by 
Marx  for  the  New  York  Tribune,  1852-3;  Paul  Matter,  La 
Prusse  et  la  Revolution  de  1848  (1903);  Charles  Sproxton,  Pal- 
mer ston  and  the  Hungarian  Revolution  (1919);  also  The  Remin- 
iscences of  Carl  SchurZy  ed.  by  Frederic  Bancroft  and  W.  A. 
Dunning,  2  vols.  (1907). 

Austria  and  Prussia:  Heinrich  Fried jung,  Oesterreich  von  1848 
bis  1860,  2  vols.  (1908-12),  best  study  of,  Der  Kampf  um  die 
Varherrschaft  in  DeiUschland,  1869  bis  1866,  2  vols.  (6th  ed. 
1904-5). 

Prussia  and  the  founding  of  the  German  Empire:  E.  Denis, 
La  Fcmdaiian  de  VEmpire  Allemand,  1852-1871  (1906) ;  Colonel 
G.  B.  Malleson,  The  Refounding  of  the  German  Empire,  184-8- 
1871  (1893);  Heinrich  von  Sybel,  Die  Begrundung  des  Deuischen 
Reiches  durch  Wilhelm  I,  7  vols.  (1889-90),  trans,  by  M.  L. 
Perrin  and  Gamahel  Bradford,  7  vols.  (1890-8). 

Austria-Hungary:  C.  M.  Knatchbull-Hugessen,  The  Poli- 
tical Evolution  of  the  Hungarian  Nation  (1908);  Louis  Eisen- 
mann,  Le  Compromis  Austro-Hongrois  de  1867  (1904),  excellent. 


CHAPTER  XI 
ITALY 

O  Rome!  my  country!  city  of  the  soul!     ... 
Lone  mother  of  dead  empires! 

Byron,  Childe  Harold,  canto  iv  (1818). 

Che  in  Italia  la  condizione  miserissima  delle  cose  sia  giunta  a  quel 
punto,  in  cui  non  v'e  salute  che  in  una  intera  e  generale  rivoluzione, 
non  e  oggimai  chi  ne  dubiti.  .  .  .  Perche  dunque  la  servitil 
dura  tuttavia  in  Italia?  ...  a  questo  non  v'e  che  una  ri- 
sposta:  I'austriaco  .  .  .  lo  stupido,  lento,  pesante  austri- 
aco — .    .    .  Mazzini,  La  Giovine  Italia,  1833. 

Sono  celebri  le  parole  pronunziate  da  Bismarck  al  1879,  che  Tltalia 
non  era  una  potenza  militare  temibile  .  .  .  Oggi  tutto  e 
mutato  in  nostro  vantaggio  ed  io  non  permetter6  che  I'ltalia 
ritorni  in  quello  stato  di  umiliazione.  .  .  . 
Francesco  Crispi  to  Commendatore  Ressman,  September,  2, 
1890. 

At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  even  the  most  Italy 
ignorant  Italian  peasant  must  have  known  dimly  some-  ^^^I^®^.*  "* 
thing  of  the  glory  and  excellence  of  his  people  in  the  past. 
Italy,  long  before,  had  been  the  center  of  the  greatest  of 
empires;  later  on  the  seat  of  noble  cities,  whose  monu- 
ments and  beauty  still  fascinated  beholders;  and  later 
still  the  Renaissance  had  risen  in  these  cities  and  thence 
spread  outward  to  inform  and  stimulate  other  parts  of 
Europe.  For  ages  Italians  had  been  leaders  in  the  thought 
and  the  knowledge  and  the  artistic  work  of  mankind.  And 
yet  after  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  as  Mazzini  said  a  genera- 
tion later,  they  had  no  standing  among  the  nations  of 
Europe,  no  flag,  and  no  common  center,  but  their  country 

249 


subjection 


250 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Earlier 
history 


/^The  French 
^-^evolution 

and 

Napoleon  3 


was  dismembered  into  parts,  some  ruled  by  foreigners, 
some  by  tyrants,  and  some  by  princelings  subservient 
to  a  foreign  master. 

(^  When  the  Roman  Empire  broke  up  in  the  west  the 
invaders  of  Italy  were  unable  to  found  strong  lasting 
states,  and  the  only  great  jurisdiction  which  arose  there 
in  the  end  was  the  religious  power  of  the  Popes  J  i,^  After  a 
while  the  German  emperors  carried  on  a  long  struggle  to 
unite  Italy  and  Germany  in  one  strong  large  domain;  but 
it  was  an  impossible  task,  and  their  failure  left  Italy 
divided  in  parts. .  Meanwhile  the  Popes  were  able  to  do 
no  more  than  found  a  small  state  lying  across  the  middle 
of  the  peninsula  and  cutting  it  in  two,  thus  effectually 
contributing  to  keep  Italy  from  being  united.  Splendid 
and  prosperous  cities  arose,  seats  of  the  highest  civiliza- 
tion in  Europe,  and  small  prosperous  states  were  founded, 
but  they  could  never  be  brought  to  unite,  and,  like  the 
communities  of  ancient  Greece,  expended  much  of  their 
energy  in  interminable  contests  with  each  other.  Mean- 
while strong  nation  states  had  slowly  been  made  in  France 
and  in  Spain.  Before  them  at  the  end  of  the  medieval 
time  Italy  lay  as  a  helpless  prize.  At  the  end  of  the  fif- 
teenth century  France  entered  the  peninsula  to  conquer 
it,  but  she  was  speedily  expelled  by  the  power  of  Spain, 
after  which  for  a  long  time  Spain  ruled  the  southern  part 
of  the  land,  Sicily  and  Naples,  and  made  her  influence 
predominant  in  the  rest.  Slowly  Spain  sank  in  weakness 
and  decay,  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
her  possessions  in  Italy  went  to  the  Empire;  though  in 
course  of  time,  Sicily  and  Naples,  passed  under  Bourbon 
power,  and,  like  Spain,  were  ruled  by  relatives  of  the  kings 
of  France. 

/At  the  time  of  the  French  Revolution  a  great  change 
began,  for  the  Italians,  stirred  at  the  mighty  changes 
taking  place  beyond  the  Alps,  began  to  dream  of  better 
things  for  themselves.  "\  Soon,  on  the  north  Italian  plains, 


ITALY  251 

Napoleon  shattered  Austria's  power,  and  laid  the  founda- 
tions of  his  military  renown.  Later  on,  when  he  had  be- 
come First  Consul  and  Emperor,  changes  were  made 
which  brought  more  benefit  to  the  Italians  than  anything 
which  had  happened  for  ages.)  It  is  true  that  they  were 
treated  as  a  conquered  population,  works  of  art  were 
carried  off  into  France,  soldiers  lived  on  the  country,  and 
generals  amassed  fortunes  for  themselves;  none  the  less, 
here,  as  in  Germany,  sweeping  reforms  were  brought  in. 
Feudalism  and  the  remains  of  serfdom  were  abolished,  the 
Code  Napoleon  introduced,  laws  were  made  uniform,  and 
civil  equality  proclaimed,  at  the  same  time  that  industry 
was  fostered  and  opportunity  opened  to  all.y  The  small 
republics  recently  set  up  when  the  French  came  into  the 
peninsula  were  abolished  along  with  the  old  and  wornout 
states^  and  Italy  was  consolidated  into  three  large  divisions:) 
the  territory  down  the  west  coast  from  Genoa  to  Rome  was 
joined  with  France;  the  land  to  the  east,  in  north  Italy 
and  along  the  Adriatic  was  made  into  the  Kingdom  of 
Italy  and  joined  with  France  under  Napoleon  who  was  its 
king;  the  southern  part,  almost  half  of  the  whole,  was 
made  into  the  Kingdom  of  Naples.  The  Italian  mainland 
had  been  largely  united  by  the  French;  and  what  they 
had  done  could  not  afterward  be  entirely  forgotten  even 
though  it  was  largely  undone. 

When  the  Congress  of  Vienna  settled  Europe's  affairs  congress 
the  feelings  of  the  17,000,000  Italians  counted  for  little;  of  Vienna 
they  were  again  divided  up  among  many  masters;  and  a 
period  of  reaction,  which  immediately  began,  restored 
as  many  as  possible  of  the  things  which  the  Revolution 
had  removed.  Austria  got  in  Italy  once  more  the  position 
she  had  so  long  had:i  Lombardy  and  Venetia,  the  best  and 
richest  parts,  were  included  in  the  Austrian  dominions,  and 
the  neighboring  districts  of  Tuscany  and  Lucca,  Parma 
and  Modena,  were  put  under  Austrian  princes,  and  made 
practically  dependent  on  her.     To  the  south,  and  straight 


252 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Condition 
of  the 
Italian 
people 


The 

foreigner's 

yoke 


across  Italy  as  of  old,  were  the  States  of  the  Church,  while 
the  southern  half  including  the  island  was  again  made  the 
Kingdom  of  the  Two  Sicilies,  under  the  Bourbons,  in  close 
alliance  with  Austria.  (  Only  in  the  northwestern  corner — 
the  Kingdom  of  Sardinia,  containing  Savoy,  Piedmont, 
the  island  of  Sardinia,  and  Genoa,  recently  given  to  it  at 
Vienna — was  there  an  Italian  state  with  any  degree  of 
independence  and  strength.  In  this  Italy,  divided  in  ten 
parts,  reaction  for  a  time  held  full  sway.  In  the  Papal 
States  as  in  Spain,  the  Inquisition  was  set  up  again,  and 
the  King  of  Sardinia,  for  a  time  even  restored  serfdom. 

As  in  other  coimtries  during  this  period  the  outlook  for 
the  people  was  dark.  In  Lombardy  and  Venetia  the 
Austrian  government  tried  to  carry  out  its  policy  of 
Germanizing,  as  far  as  possible,  the  populations  of  the 
different  provinces  of  its  empire,  political  activity  on  the 
part  of  Italians  was  suppressed,  the  offices  and  the  courts 
were  filled  with  German  officials,  and  the  people  burdened 
with  taxes  far  heavier  than  in  other  provinces  of  the  Haps- 
burg  dominions.  In  the  neighboring  duchies  the  rulers 
imitated  Austrian  methods,  though  sometimes  conditions 
were  better.  In  the  Papal  States  a  burdensome  and 
ineffective  government  was  entirely  in  the  hands  of  ec- 
clesiastics. The  people  of  the  Two  Sicilies  were  subject 
to  a  corrupt  and  ignorant  despotism  which  succeeded  less 
in  governing  than  oppressing.  In  none  of  these  states 
were  there  parliaments  or  constitutions  or  any  limitation 
on  the  despotic  rule  of  the  princes;  there  was  no  freedom  of 
speech  or  of  the  press,  and  little  education.  It  is  true  that 
such  conditions  prevailed  generally  over  Europe  then, 
except  only  in  England  and  France,  and  that  the  German 
people  also  were  divided  among  despots  at  this  time.  But 
it  was  the  misfbrtune  of  Italians  that  they,  almost  as 
much  as  the  Poles  and  Huiigarians  then,  suffered  op- 
pression largely  from  foreign  masters.  Throughout  Italy, 
except  in  the  Kingdom  of  Sardinia,  the  power  or  influence 


I 


7 7 

/         oBerne  "^'s^u 

r'    SWITZERLAND         I 


Toulon 


^%l  AN       EMPIRE 


\   OTTOMAN 

enoa 


^.^  M  P  I  R  £ 
\ 


m^Bm 


^  «* 
o 


^i^^>s 


T  T  B  B  HE  N  I  A  N 


Gulf  of 
Tara-nio 


8   B  4 


OF    THE> 


E:/^v?-l  Austrian, 

under  separate  administration^ 


AFRICA 


SEA 


S 


^  A 


GENERAL  DRAFTING  CO.INCW.Y. 


11.     ITALY  IN  1815 


85S 


254 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Hopeless 
outlook 


The 
Carbonari 


Mazzini 


of  Austria  was  supreme.  (LMettemich  declared  Italy  to 
be  only  a  geographical  expression,  and  it  was  his  policy 
to  keep  her  divided  in  fragments  and  within  the  parts 
uphold  the  rule  of  the  petty,  subordinate  princes.  It 
seemed  hopeless  to  strive  for  an  Italy  free  and  united. 
The  Italians  had  been  so  long  divided  among  numerous 
city  states  and  princes  that  now  local  differences  made  it 
diflScult  to  bring  them  under  one  government.  Moreover, 
so  long  as  Austrian  power  continued  in  Italy,  there  could 
be  small  hope  of  improvement  in  political  conditions, 
since  the  most  reactionary  rulers  in  the  peninsula  were 
encouraged  by  Austria  to  resist  all  change  and  supported 
by  the  overwhelming  Hapsburg  power.  And  there  seemed 
small  chance  of  removing  Austrian  influence  and  domina- 
tion, since  Austria  was  now  leader  in  Europe.  In  Italy 
there  was  no  sta^e  which  could  for  a  moment  have  success- 
fully challenged  her.  Accordingly,  for  some  years  political 
and  social  discontent  in  Italy  took  the  only  form  that  was 
possible.;  A  secret  society,  whose  members  called  them- 
selves Carbonari  (or  charcoal  burners),  was  formed  in  the 
Kingdom  of  Naples  and  thence  spread  all  over  the  penin- 
sula, until  it  numbered  several  hundred  thousand  mem- 
bers. ;  The  purpose  of  the  Carbonari  was  to  drive  the 
foreigner  out  of  Italy  and  make  things  better,  but  working 
furtively  and  without  good  general  organization  they  did 
little,  and  Metternich  never  considered  them  very  formid- 
able. They  had  much  to  do  in  bringing  about  revolution- 
ary movements  in  1820,  1821,  1831,  and  1832,  but  these 
uprisings  were  easily  suppressed  by  Austrian  troops.  The 
principal  work  of  the  Carbonari  was  to  keep  alive  the  spirit 
of  nationality  and  patriotism,  which  the  years  of  the 
Revolution  and  Napoleon  had  awakened. 
(  That  work  was  carried  forward  in  the  following  years, 
in  the  period  known  as  the  Risorgimento  or  era  of  resur- 
rectioji^  Gradually  a  great  many  of  the  most  active,  eager,- 
and  intelligent  Italians  were  aroused  until  the  deliverance 


ITALY  ^55 

and  reform  of  their  country  became  a  great  passion.  First 
and  chief  among  the  leaders  of  this  period  was  Giuseppe 
Mazzini,  father  and  prophet  of  the  movement.  In  his 
youth  he  felt  strongly  the  woes  and  degradation  of  his 
country,  and,  dreaming  of  her  freedom,  joined  the  secret 
society,  for  which  he  was  arrested  and  imprisoned.  After 
his  release,  almost  all  of  a  long  life  he  lived  as  an  exile  in 
England,  Switzerland,  and  France.  In  1831  he  founded 
the  Society  of  Young  Italy,  believing  that  successful 
revolution  could  only  be  made  by  the  people  and  that  the 
people  were  most  easily  led  forward  by  their  youth.  At 
a  time  when  most  Italians  still  desired  only  to  drive  Austria 
away  or  to  bring  about  reform,  Mazzini  believed  that  the  The 
Italians  must  be  one  nation,  and  he  taught  this  with  burn-  ^^^^^'' 
ing  eloquence  to  the  followers  who  gathered  about  him. 
He  tried  to  make  them  remember  their  common  language 
and  their  culture  and  the  glory  of  their  fathers  in  the  past. 
But  he  was  an  enthusiast  and  a  splendid  dreamer  much 
more  than  a  practical  statesman.  He  believed  that  the 
deliverance  of  Italy  must  come  through  an  uprising  of  the  ) 
people  and  the  establishment  of  democracy  by  them. 
Actually,  however,  this  idea  took  little  hold  on  the  minds 
of  most  Italians,  and  the  liberation  and  unification  of 
Italy  were  to  be  brought  about  by  others  who  followed. 

Mazzini  and  his  followers  advocated  a  republic.  But  Italian 
the  patriots  who  worked  for  the  Risorgimento  were  not  ^*^**y 
agreed  as  to  the  methods  by  which  the  unification  of  Italy 
should  be  brought  about.  Many  believed  that  a  republic 
was  impracticable.  Some,  like  the  priest  Gioberti,  thought 
that  the  utmost  to  be  hoped  for  was  a  federation  under  the 
leadership  of  the  Pope.  Others  believed  that  the  hope  of 
Italy  lay  in  accepting  as  leader  the  one  strong  Italian  state, 
Piedmont  or  Sardinia,  ruled  by  the  House  of  Savoy. 

In  1846  Pius  IX,  a  liberal  Pope,  began  his  pontificate,     jhe 
He  was  believed  to  be  opposed  to  the  Austrians^  and  it     Revolution 
was  known  that  he  had  been  much  influenced  by  XJioberti's     ^^  ^®*® 


356 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

Roman 

Republic 


writings.  At  once  he  proclaimed  a  pardon  for  political 
offenders,  and  instituted  reforms  in  the  States  of  the 
Church.  Such  was  the  eflPect  of  this  upon  Italians  else- 
where that  in  the  following  month  the  Sicilians  rose  in 
revolt  and  set  up  a  constitutional  government,  and  this 
led  Ferdinand  II,  King  of  the  Two  Sicilies,  to  grant  a 
constitution  in  Naples.  What  had  been  done  in  the 
southern  districts  now  influenced  the  states  farther  north, 
and  constitutions  were  soon  proclaimed,  by  the  Pope  in  Tus- 
cany,  and  finally  by  the  government  of  Piedmont.  Metter- 
nich  was  not  able  to  intervene,  for  in  the  spring  of  1848  he 
was  driven  from  power.  The  end  of  the  Austrian  Empire 
seemed  to  have  come.  In  Lombardy  the  Austrian  troops 
were  driven  out  of  Milan,  and  the  Republic  of  St.  Mark 
was  established  in  Venice.  Tl^e  rebels  sought  \he  Assist- 
ance of  Charles  Albert,  King  of  Piedmont,  and  when  now 
he  accepted  leadership,  Italians  from  all  over  the  penin- 
sula joined  him.  But  Radetzky,  the  Austrian  commander 
took  refuge  in  the  Quadrilateral,  and  the  Italians  failed 
to  follow  up  their  first  triumphs  and  cut  him  off  from  his 
base  and  reinforcements.  Then  the  Pope,  who  regarded 
Catholic  Austria  as  one  of  the  main  supports  of  the  church, 
withdrew  from  the  contest,  and  was  followed  by  the  King 
of  Naples.  The  people  of  some  of  the  north  Italian  states 
now  voted  for  union  with  Piedmont,  and  that  power 
continued  the  contest;  but  the  Piedmontese  were  de- 
feated in  the  battle  of  Custozza,  and  the  Austrians,  cap- 
turing Milan,  were  masters  of  north  Italy  again.  A 
revolution  now  breaking  out  in  Rome,  a  republic  was  pro- 
claimed under  Mazzini.  Early  in  1849,  Piedmont,  which 
had  made  an  armistice  with  Austria,  began  the  war  again, 
but  was  soon  totally  defeated  at  Novara,  after  which 
Charles  Albert  abdicated  in  favor  of  his  son  Victor  Em- 
manuel II,  and  went  into  exile.  Venice  was  still  holding 
out,  but  she  also  was  overcome,  and  once  more  the  power 
of  Austria  was  completely  restored.    Meanwhile  France, 


ITALY  257 

wishing  to  forestall  intervention  by  Austria,  had  sent  troops 
into  Italy  and  brought  the  Roman  Republic  to  an  end. 
^   Thus  the  Risorgimento  seemed  to  have  failed.     In  the     xhe  new 
course  of  another  decade,  however,  most  of  the  work  of     era 
unification  was  achieved,  and  the  foreign  master  almost 
driven  completely  out.     This  was  the  work  of  Piedmont, 
and  it  was  brought  about  very  largely  through  Count 
Camillo  di  Cavour  (1810-1861),  the  greatest  and  most 
successful  statesman  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

In  the  midst  of  the  humiliation  of  the  years  after  Cavour 
^  Novara,  Cavour  came  to  the  head  of  the  government  of 
Piedmont.  First  he  gave  himself  to  remarkable  construc- 
tive work  in  reforming  the  finances  and  developing  the 
prosperity  "of  his  country,  at  the  same  time  that  he  strength- 
ened its  army.  This  was  the  prelude  and  foundation 
of  his  greater  work  later  on.  From  the  beginning  he 
planned  to  expel  the  Austrians  from  Italy.  He  knew  very 
well  that  Sardinia  could  never  hope  to  oppose  Austria 
unaided,  and  yet  that  the  great  powers  would  be  more  apt 
to  side  with  Austria  in  preserving  the  status  quo  than 
assist  a  part  of  Italy  against  her.  Nevertheless,  he  went 
to  work  with  patience  and  consummate  skill,  first  to  raise 
Piedmont  in  the  estimation  of  Europe  by  strengthening 
her  power  and  enhancing  her  prestige;  to  get  her  some 
powerful  friend;  then,  to  isolate  Austria  so  that  she  would 
have  to  stand  alone  against  his  combination,  and  finally 
to  provoke^Austria  to  be  the  aggressor. 

He  assumed  the  direction  of  the  Sardinian  government  Austria 
in  1852.  Three  years  later  he  brought  Piedmont  into  the  '^^^^^^^^ 
Crimean  War  along  with  France  and  Great  Britain,  thus 
getting  the  gratitude  and  esteem  of  these  powers.  He  had 
his  reward  in  1856,  when  he  represented  Piedmont  at  the 
Congress  of  Paris,  and  succeeded  in  bringing  to  the  atten- 
tion of  Europe  his  protest  against  misrule  by  the  Austrians 
in  Italy.  He  had  now  got  the  friendship  of  two  great 
governments,  and  increasing  sympathy  for  Italian  aspira- 


258  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

tions  among  the  people  of  France  and  especially  of  Eng- 
land.^ On  the  other  hand  Austria  was  finding  herself 
more  and  more  friendless  and  alone.  Prussia  was  getting 
ready  to  challenge  her  leadership  in  Germany,  and  she  had 
just  lost  the  friendship  of  Russia,  from  having  failed  to 
give  assistance  in  the  Crimean  War  to  repay  Russian  help 
in  1849  in  suppressing  the  Hungarian  revolt. 

Napoleon  III  Cavour  now  gained  a  great  and  powerful  ally.  Na- 
poleon in  of  France  desired  to  strengthen  his  position 
by  successful  policy  abroad.  Moreover  he  sympathized 
with  Italian  aspirations.  He  understood  also  that  his 
people  would  rejoice  at  any  overthrow  of  the  settlement 
of  1815,  imposed  on  Europe  when  France  had  been  de- 
feated. So  Cavour  was  gradually  able  to  win  him  over, 
and  in  1858,  at  the  Conference  of  Plombieres,  Napoleon 
promised  to  give  assistance  in  return  for  the  cession  to 
France  of  Savoy. 

War  with  It  was  soon  evident  that  great  events  were  impending. 

Austria,  The   statesmen  of  Europe  suggested  ^  congress  of  the 

powers  for  settling  the  Italian  matter.  In  1859  Austria 
rashly  declared  war.  The  forces  of  the  allies  under 
Napoleon  and  Victor  Emmanuel  encountered  the  Aus- 
trians  on  the  Lombardy  plains  and  gained  the  great  vic- 
tories of  Magenta  and  Solferino,  as  a  result  of  which  Milan 
was  taken  and  the  Austrians  driven  into  Venetia.  Sol- 
ferino was  the  greatest  battle  which  had  been  fought  since 
the  time  of  Napoleon  1, 260,000  men  being  engaged  and  the 
losses  very  heavy.  Neither  the  French  nor  the  Austrians 
had  spent  their  force  yet;  nevertheless  the  war  went  no 
further.  Austria  had  a  strong  position  behind  the  Vene- 
tian fortresses,  but  Hungary  was  restless  behind  her.  In 
France  the  clericals  were  now  in  bitter  opposition  to  the 
Emperor's  Italian  policy,  while  the  Prussians  were  mak- 
ing ominous  preparations  along  the  Rhine.  Furthermore, 
in  Italy  events  were  fast  running  beyond  what  Napoleon 
had  expected.     As  the  Austrian  garrisons  were  withdrawn 


1859 


ITALY 


259 


from  northern  Italy,  the  people  of  Tuscany,  Parma, 
Modena,  and  the  Papal  States,  rose  in  an  enthusiasm  that 
could  not  be  restrained  and  asked  to  be  joined  to  Pied- 
mont. Napoleon  had  gone  to  war  to  win  the  Austrian 
provinces  for  Piedmont,  but  he  had  no  more  intention 
of  erecting  to  the  south  of  France  a  powerful  nation 
embracing  all  Italy  than  somewhat  later  he  had  welcome 
for  the  unification  of  the  German  peoples.  Therefore, 
hastily  now  and  without  the  knowledge  of  Cavour,  he 
concluded  the  armistice  of  Villafranca.  By  the  terms  of 
this  arrangement,  which  were  afterward  embodied  in  the 
Peace  of  Zurich  (1859),  Lombardy  was  ceded  to  Piedmont, 
Venetia  remained  with  the  Hapsburgs,  and  it  was  arranged 
that  the  Pope  and  the  deposed  princes  in  northern  and 
central  Italy  should  be  restored. 

But  the  Italian  people  now  went  forward  with  the  work 
themselves,  those  who  had  obtained  freedom  from  their 
Austrian  princelings  refusing  to  acknowledge  them  again. ) 
Napoleon  was  in  a  dilemma:  he  had  never  planned  to 
let  things  go  so  far,  yet  he  wished  to  support  the  principle 
of  nationality  which  so  often  before  he  had  proclaimed. 
Therefore  he  would  not  allow  Austria  to  intervene  with 
force,  and  agreed  to  the  proposal  of  Great  Britain  that 
plebiscites  should  be  held  to  determine  the  wishes  of  the 
inhabitants  themselves.  The  people  voted  by  huge 
majorities  to  join  the  Kingdom  of  Sardinia.  For  his 
support  which  had  made  this  possible  Napoleon  got  from 
Piedmont  her  province  of  Nice  as  well  as  Savoy;  but  Pied- 
mont had  now  become  the  most  important  and  powerful 
of  all  the  Italian  states.  Within  a  year  her  territory  had 
been  greatly  enlarged  and  her  population  increased  from 
five  millions  to  eleven  millions.  Since  the  time  of  the  Con- 
gress of  Vienna  there  had  been  no  lasting  political  change 
such  as  this. 

/    Italy's  expansion  was  now  carried  much  farther  forward 
by  the  impulses  of  the  people  and  the  leadership  of  an 


Enthusiasm 
among  the 
Italians 


Unification 
of  northern 
Italy 


Garibaldi 


260  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

Italian  patriot  whose  splendid  and  picturesque  exploits 
revived  the  deeds  of  the  time  of  old  romance.  All  the 
southern  part  of  Italy  was  still  included  in  the  corrupt  and 
worthless  Bourbon  monarchy  of  the  Two  Sicilies,  estab- 
lished on  the  ignorance  and  wretchedness  of  its  people. 
Now,  men  who  had  once  been  inspired  by  Mazzini  planned 
to  overthrow  it.  Soon  they  came  under  the  lead  of  the 
bold  and  dashing  Giuseppe  Garibaldi,  a  native  of  Nice, 
who  had  served  the  Roman  Republic,  then  fled  from  Italy 
to  serve  in  South  American  wars  and  live  in  exile  abroad. 
In  the  spring  of  1860  he  suddenly  landed  with  his  followers, 
the  "Thousand,"  in  Sicily.  At  once  the  eflFete  Bourbon 
power  tottered  and  fell  to  the  groimd,  and  in  September 
the  Garibaldians  also  took  possession  of  Naples.  Then 
they  planned  to  march  northward  and  occupy  Rome,  still 
garrisoned  by  soldiers  of  France.  The  papal  government 
collected  a  force  of  mercenaries  from  catholic  countries 
to  resist,  and  there  was  grave  danger  that  some  of  the 
European  powers  might  intervene  and  undo  much  of  what 
Southern  Cavour  and  the  Italian  leaders  had  accomplished.     But 

Italy  joined  again  Cavour  managed  the  situation  with  the  greatest 
skill  and  good  fortune.  The  government  of  Piedmont 
called  upon  Rome  to  disband  its  new  forces,  and,  when  this 
was  refused,  declared  war.  Almost  at  once  the  forces 
of  the  Pope  were  routed  at  Castelfidardo,  and  the  States 
of  the  Church  were  occupied.  Then  the  victors  marched 
southward  across  the  frontier  of  the  Kingdom  of  Naples, 
and,  meeting  the  King,  Garibaldi  surrendered  to  him  the  au- 
thority which  his  arms  had  just  gained.  Again  the  device 
of  the  plebiscite  was  tried.  In  the  autumn  the  people 
of  the  Two  Sicilies,  and  about  the  same  time  the 
people  of  the  Papal  States,  voted  for  annexation  to 
the  Sardinian  Kingdom  by  such  overwhelming  majorities 
that  men  could  say  the  unification  of  Italy  had  been 
achieved  by  the  will  of  the  people  as  well  as  by  diplomacy 
and  fortunate  battles  and  the  march  of  events.     In  Feb- 


to  the 
north,  1860 


ITALY 


261 


ruary,  1861,  an  assembly  representing  all  Italy — except 
Venetia,  still  in  Austria's  hands;  Rome,  still  kept  by  the 
Pope;  and  Nice  and  Savoy,  now  ceded  to  France — met  in 
Turin,  where,  a  month  later,  the  Kingdom  of  Italy  was 
proclaimed,  under  the  King  of  Sardinia,  and  the  names  of 
Sardinia,  of  Piedmont,  of  Savoy,  receded  as  glorious 
memories  into  the  past. 

A  few  months  later  Cavour  passed  away,  his  death 
brought  on  by  the  excessive  burdens  he  had  carried.  He 
died  just  before  his  work  was  completely  accomplished, 
but  when  the  indispensable  part  had  been  fully  achieved. 
What  remained  to  be  done  could  be  brought  about  by 
successors  when  opportunity  arose.  He  seems  now  to 
have  been  the  greatest  and  most  truly  successful  states- 
man of  the  century  in  which  he  lived.  Shortly  after, 
Germany  was  united  and  a  far  greater  power  built  up  by 
another  statesman,  whose  mighty  success  for  a  while 
made  Cavour 's  accomplishment  seem  small.  But  a  great 
part  of  what  Bismarck  did  was  done  by  violence,  and,  after 
two  generations,  by  violence  much  of  it  was  undone. 
On  the  other  hand  Cavour  throughout  his  career  believed 
in  constitutional  government  based  on  the  will  of  the  people; 
what  he  helped  so  greatly  to  bring  about  was  made  possible 
largely  by  the  will  of  the  people  affected,  and  so  was  based 
solidly  on  their  affection  and  desires.  When  he  died  his 
work  was  virtually  done;  it  has  needed  no  great  wars  to 
maintain  it;  and  it  did  not  violently  disturb  European 
politics  or  afterward  make  Europe  an  armed  camp. 

In  1866  Italy  joined  Prussia  against  Austria,  and 
shared  in  the  Prussian  success.  She  now  got  Venetia, 
rounding  out  her  kingdom  in  the  northeast.  Unfortun- 
ately not  all  the  Italian  population,  of  this  part  of  Europe 
was  then  given  to  her,  a  considerable  number  remaining 
under  Austrian  rule  across  the  Alps  in  the  Trentino,  and 
at  the  head  of  the  Adriatic  about  Trieste.  Furthermore, 
the  frontier  was  so  drawn  that  Austria  kept  all  the  heights 


The  King- 
dom of 
Italy*  1861 


The 

greatness 
of  Cavour 


Venetia 

obtained, 

1866 


262 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


of  the  mountains  and  places  of  strength.  All  through  the 
nineteenth  century  the  Italian  districts  which  Italy  had 
not  yet  got  were  known  as  Italia  Irredenta,  and  they  re- 
mained unredeemed  until  Italy's  great  triumph  over 
Austria  in  1918. 

Meanwhile,  what  was  then  more  important  had  been 
brought  about.  Before  his  death  Cavour  had  declared 
that  Rome  was  the  natural  capital  of  Italy.  So  long 
as  French  soldiers  held  it  for  the  Pope  it  was  not  to  be 
won;  but  when  the  Franco-Prussian  war  broke  out  in 
1870  the  French  garrison  was  withdrawn,  Rome  was 
occupied  by  the  Italian  government,  and  became  the 
capital  instead  of  Florence  which  had  recently  replaced 
Turin.  Thus  the  Popes  lost  the  last  part  of  their  territory, 
some  of  which  they  had  held  for  more  than  a  thousand 
years.  For  time  beyond  memory,  it  seemed,  Rome  had 
been  the  capital  of  the  Catholic  world  and  the  city  of  the 
Pope,  and  many  Catholics  regarded  the  taking  of  the  city 
as  desecration  and  insult  to  God.  The  Italian  government 
strove  to  make  some  compromise,  and  in  1871  passed  the 
Law  of  the  Papal  Guarantees,  by  which  the  Popes  were  to 
have  the  Vatican  and  certain  other  places,  and  their  gar- 
dens adjoining,  in  full  sovereignty.  They  were  to  retain 
complete  independence  and  have  their  own  court,  the  Curia 
Romana,  from  which  they  might  deal  with  other  powers  as 
sovereign  rulers.  From  the  Italian  government,  moreover, 
they  were  to  receive  an  annual  income.  But  the  Popes 
refused  to  accept  the  settlement;  they  have  not  taken  the 
payments;  and,  as  "prisoners  of  the  Vatican,"  have  so  far 
remained  within  the  tiny  jurisdiction  left  them. 

The  new  Italian  Kingdom  was  a  constitutional  mon- 
archy, having  with  some  changes  the  constitution  given 
to  Piedmont  in  1848.  Like  the  constitutions  of  France, 
it  was  modelled  largely  on  the  British  system.  The 
executive  was  to  be  the  king  and  his  ministers.  The 
legislative  body  was  a  parliament  consisting  of  two  houses. 


46i.. 


ITALY 


26S 


Upon  a  majority  in  the  lower  chamber  the  ministry  de- 
pended for  its  power.     The  franchise,  as  elsewhere  in  most 
places  then,  was  restricted  by  a  high  property  qualifica- 
tion.   Afterward,  in  1882,  the  franchise  was  given  not 
only  to  those  who  paid  a  certain  amount  in  taxes  but  also 
to  those  able  to  read  and  write;  and  in  1912  the  electorate 
was  greatly  extended  by  the  introduction  of  manhood 
suffrage.     Illiteracy,    an    inheritance    common    to   most 
countries   from   older   times,   lingered   on,  especially  in 
southern   Italy,    and    disappeared    very    slowly,    largely 
because  of  the  great  poverty  of  the  people.     By  the  end 
of  the  nineteenth  century  more  than  half  of  them  were 
still  unable  to  read  and  write.     For  a  long  time  they 
had  been  plundered  by  foreign  masters  or  held  in  subjec- 
tion by  small  tyrants.     Now  population  was  increasing 
rapidly  until  after  a  while  it  was  as  large  as  that  of  France, 
but  the  territory  was  much  smaller  and  the  soil  far  less 
rich.     The  Italian  people  gained  their  freedom  at  a  time 
when  western  and  central  Europe  was  being  transformed 
by  the  industrial  revolution,  as  Great  Britain  had  pre- 
viously been;  but  Italy  had  no  stores  of  iron  and  oil,  and 
was  completely  lacking  in  coal.     Accordingly,  while  there 
was  splendid  industrial  development  in  the  north,  Italy 
could  not  be  one  of  the  great  industrial  countries.     More- 
over, partly  through  ambition  to  play  a  great  part  in 
Europe,  partly  through  a  feeling  that  it  was  necessary, 
Italy  embarked  upon  an  ambitious  course  in  foreign  af- 
fairs, and  presently,  joining  the  Triple  Alliance,  found  it 
necessary  to  maintain  an  army  and  a  navy  far  beyond  her 
proper  resources.     Therefore,  notwithstanding  that  taxa- 
tion was  so  crushing  as  to  bow  down  the  people  and  ham- 
per development,  almost  all  of  the  public  revenue  was  long 
devoted   to   paying  for  the   army,  the   navy,  and    the 
interest  on  the  public  debt.     That  the  Italians,  in  spite 
of  these  disadvantages,  went  steadily  though  slowly  for- 
ward on  the  road  of  real  improvement  and  made  them- 


Impedi- 
ments  to 
progress 


864  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

selves,  one  of  the  great  powers  of  Europe  was  due,  above 
all,  to  the  strength  and  character  of  the  people  themselves. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General  accounts:  for  the  student  who  reads  Italian  the  best 
is  P.  L.  Orsi,  Vltalia  Modema:  Storia  degli  UUimi  150  Anni 
(2d  ed.  1902);  Bolton  King,  History  of  Italian  Unity y  2  vols. 
(1899),  best  account  in  English;  Evelyn  (Countess)  Martinengo- 
Cesaresco,  The  Liberation  of  Italy ^  1815-1870  (1895);  W.  J. 
Stillman,  The  Union  of  Italy y  1815-1895  (1898). 

Particular  periods:  R.  M.  Johnston,  The  Napoleonic  Empire 
in  Southern  Italy  and  the  Rise  of  the  Secret  Societies,  2  vols.  (1904) , 
The  Roman  Theocracy  and  the  Republic,  18^6-1849  (1901); 
Ernesto  Masi,  II  Risorgimento  Italiano,  2  vols.  (1918);  H.  R. 
Whitehouse,  Collapse  of  the  Kingdom  of  Naples  (1899);  ]6. 
Bourgeois  and  E.  Clermont,  Rome  et  NapoUon  III  (1907); 
Ernest  Lemonon,  V Italic  Economique  et  Sociale,  1861-1912 
(1913);  A.  Pingaud,  Vltalie  depuis  1870  (1915);  Bolton  King 
and  Thomas  Okey,  Italy  To-day  (2d  ed.  1909);  F.  M.  Under- 
wood, United  Italy  (1912);  W.  K.  Wallace,  Greater  Italy  (1917), 
for  colonial  expansion. 

The  States  of  the  Church:  M.  Brah,  Geschichte  des  Kirchen- 
stoats,  3  vols.     (1897-1900). 

Biographies:  R.  S.  Holland,  Builders  of  United  Italy  (1908); 
Massimo  D'Azeglio,  /  Miei  Ricordi,  3  vols.  (ed.  1899) ;  W.  R. 
Thayer,  The  Life  and  Times  of  Cavour,  2  vols.  (1911),  the  best; 
Luigi  Chiala,  Letter e  Edite  ed  Inedite  di  Camillo  Cavour,  10  vols. 
(2d  ed.  1883-7);  W.  J.  Stillman,  Francesco  Crisjri  (1899); 
Francesco  Crispi,  Politica  Estera;  Memorie  e  Documenti  ed.  by 
T.  Palamenghi-Crispi  (1914),  Memoirs  of  Francesco  Crispi, 
3  vols.  (1912-14);  G.  M.  Trevelyan,  Garibaldi's  Defense  of 
the  Roman  Republic  (1907),  Garibaldi  and  the  Thousand  (1909), 
Garibaldi  and  the  Making  of  Italy  (1911),  brilliantly  written; 
Giuseppe  Garibaldi,  Memorie  Autobiograflche  (1888);  Bolton 
King,  Joseph  Mazzini  (1902);  Scritti  Editi  ed  Inediti  di  Giu- 
seppe Mazzini,  27  vols.  (1906-18);  A.  Pougeois,  Histoire  de  Pie 
IX  et  de  Son  Pontifical,  6  vols.  (1877— 88);  G.  S.  Godkin,  Life 
of  Victor  Emmanuel  II,  2  vols.  (1879);  G.  Massari,  La  Vita  ed 
il  Regno  di  Vittorio  Emanuele  IL  2  vols.  (1901). 


^ 


CHAPTER  XII 
RUSSIA,  1789-1881 

What  man  ever  thought  that  Moscow  would  one  day  be  accounted 
an  Empire?  Once  by  the  river  Moskva  stood  only  the  hamletg 
erf  the  worthy  boyar,  Stephen  Kutchak,  son  of  Ivan. 

— Russian  tale  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

Th  h  yOoraa,  tbi  h  oSnjibHaji, 
Tbi  h  Moryqaji,  th  h  6e3CHJibHaH, 
MaiyniKa  Pycb! 

[Thou  art  destitute,  yet  abounding. 
Thou  art  powerful,  thou  art  weak, 
O  beloved  Mother  Russia!] 

Nekrasov  (1821-1878) 

It  was  not  until  the  eighteenth  century  that  Russia  Russia 
really  became  a  factor  in  European  politics,  not  until  the  ^^ 
nineteenth  that  she  became  an  important  factor,  and  she  Europe 
did  not  greatly  affect  the  western  world  until  only  a 
short  while  ago.  In  old  times  her  land  and  her  inhabitants 
were  little  known  to  other  European  peoples.  Scarcely 
any  of  what  now  is  Russia  was  ever  a  part  of  the  Roman 
Empire.  When  the  poet  Ovid  was  sent  an  exile  to  Tomi 
near  the  mouth  of  the  Danube,  it  seemed  to  him  that  he 
went  forth  into  the  farthest  region  of  the  world.  In  the 
Middle  Ages  Spaniards,  Frenchmen,  Italians,  Englishmen, 
knew  little  of  the  Slavs  who  would  one  day  possess  all  the 
eastern  half  of  the  continent.  The  Roman  Empire  had 
been  divided  into  two  portions,  a  Latin  half  in  the  west 
and  an  eastern  half  essentially  Greek,  which  little  under- 
;stood  each  other  and  easily  fell  apart.     Then  Europe  for 

265 


266  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

many  hundreds  of  years  was  divided  into  a  western  half, 
with  peoples  having  the  Roman  Catholic  religion  and 
Romano-Teutonic  civilization,  and  an  eastern  half,  held 
by  the  expiring  Eastern  Roman  Empire  at  Constantinople, 
and  after  a  great  while  by  the  intruding  Turks,  and  also 
by  Slavonic  people,  who  had  taken  the  Eastern  Christ- 
ianity of  Constantinople.  These  two  parts  had  little 
intercourse  and  knew  little  of  each  other,  except  that 
throughout  the  Middle  Ages  the  Germans  of  central 
Europe  were  pushing  eastward,  slowly  but  steadily  driv- 
ing back  their  Slavic  neighbors,  and  founding  Austria  and 
Prussia. 

During  this  time  the  Poles,  a  part  of  the  Slavic  people, 
were  founding  a  great  state  in  east  central  Europe.  The 
Russians,  another  branch,  were  laying  the  foundations 
of  a  state  in  what  is  now  southern  Russia,  about  Kiev. 
On  their  southern  and  eastern  frontiers  they  were  harassed 
by  Tartar  nomads  whose  cruelty  and  rapine  long  hindered 
the  development  of  better  culture  among  them;  and  in  the 
twelfth  century  all  of  eastern  Europe  was  scourged  by  a 
more  terrible  and  lasting  barbarian  invasion  than  had 
ever  come  to  the  west.  The  Mongols  from  central  Asia, 
brave  and  skilful  warriors  but  merely  horsemen  and 
shepherds,  who  had  already  spread  their  conquests  and 
desolation  across  to  the  Pacific  and  down  into  China,  came 
also  into  eastern  Europe,  and  the  rising  Russian  state  was 
broken  to  pieces.  The  people  long  remained  under  debas- 
ing tyranny,  ruled  by  their  own  princes,  but  compelled 
to  pay  tribute  to  the  Mongols,  whose  capital  was  at  Serai' 
on  the  Volga.  For  some  centuries  they  remained  subject 
with  no  chance  for  the  development  of  free  institutions 
like  those  emerging  in  western  Europe.  Russian  princes 
fawned  upon  their  Mongol  lord  and  sought  his  favor,  and 
so  long  as  they  paid  tribute  they  had  his  protection.  Of 
all  who  paid  court  the  princes  of  Moscow  gained  greatest 
favor.    In  course  of  time  they  became  strong  enough  to 


( 


RUSSIA,   1789-1881 


267 


throw  off  the  conquerors'  yoke  and  in  Muscovy  made 
the  beginning  of  modern  Russia,  taking  for  themselves, 
in  imitation  of  the  Roman  emperors,  the  title  of  Tsar 
(Caesar).  So  the  medieval  period  came  to  a  close.  These 
Slavs,  with  their  rude  culture  and  little  prosperity,  were 
scarcely  thought  about  in  England  and  France.  As  late 
as  the  time  of  Queen  Elizabeth  the  Russians  were  not  so 
well  known  to  the  English  as  the  people  of  India  and  China, 
and  traders  and  explorers  were  just  beginning  to  cross 
the  vast  distances  and  reach  them. 

During  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  the 
Russians  of  the  country  about  Moscow,  increasing  in 
numbers,  spread  steadily  forth  to  the  south  and  the  east, 
gradually  getting  for  themselves  a  huge  inland  empire. 
Geographical  conditions  were  very  potent,  just  as  they 
always  have  been.  The  Russians  were  placed  in  the 
greatest  of  all  the  plains  in  the  world.  From  the  Car- 
pathian Mountains,  to  the  east  of  Hungary,  a  great  level 
stretch  of  land  runs  eastward  over  the  remaining  half  of 
Europe,  spreading  out  to  the  north  and  south  as  it  goes, 
until  it  is  partly  bounded  by  the  low  Ural  Mountains.  But 
they  afford  scarcely  an  obstacle,  and  through  them  men 
easily  cross  into  Asia  where  the  plain  continues  intermin- 
ably all  across  the  breadth  of  the  continent,  until  at  last, 
seven  thousand  miles  from  where  it  began,  it  ends  north 
of  China  on  the  Pacific.  It  is  vast,  monotonous,  seldom 
rising  high  or  sloping  much,  not  often  divided  by  moun- 
tains, nowhere  broken  off  into  distinct  parts,  traversed  by 
broad,  slowly  moving  rivers — always  its  best  avenues  of 
communication.  This  plain  is  the  mother  of  the  Slavic 
peoples.  In  the  sixteenth  century  the  teeming  Russians 
from  the  district  about  Moscow  began  spreading  out  over 
it.  In  the  course  of  two  hundred  years  they  had  occupied 
most  of  it,  and  by  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 
they  had  brought  almost  all  of  it  within  one  great  Russian 
empire. 


Muscovy 


The  Russian 
Plain 


968 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Th« 

•xpanaion 
of  Russia 


Rusgia 

a  European 
power 


Peter 
the  Great 


The  Russian  colonists  went  forth  along  their  rivers  and 
into  new  stretches  of  the  plain  somewhat  as  the  American 
colonists  and  pioneers  took  the  middle  part  of  North 
America  in  the  nineteenth  century.  The  extension  of 
power  was  carried  forward  by  the  vigorous  and  able  ruler 
Ivan  (John)  III,  the  Great,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  six- 
teenth century.  In  his  reign,  Russian  colonists  went  east 
and  began  to  conquer  the  tribes  of  Sibir.  In  the  period 
1581-1700  all  northern  Siberia  was  taken.  Until  the  end 
of  the  sixteenth  century  the  Poles  had  been  the  principal 
Slavic  power  in  Europe,  and  had  sometimes  held  many 
of  the  eastern  peoples  in  subjection,  but  under  the  new 
Romanov  Dynasty ,  which  began  to  reign  in  1613,  the  Poles 
were  checked,  and  in  1667,  by  the  Treaty  of  Andrussovo, 
the  Russians  obtained  Kiev,  part  of  the  Ukraine,  and  got 
the  frontier  of  the  Dnieper  river. 

Down  to  this  time  Muscovy  had  been  a  state  with  in- 
terests and  ambitions  to  the  east  rather  than  the  west, 
essentially  eastern  and  even  Asiatic  in  character;  but  the 
Romanov  rulers  began  to  cherish  the  ambition  of  extending 
their  territory  to  get  an  outlet  on  the  western  seas.  This 
work,  begun  in  the  seventeenth  century,  was  the  great 
task  of  the  century  that  followed.  When  it  had  been 
brought  to  completion  Russia's  three  western  neighbors, 
Sweden,  Poland,  and  Turkey,  had  been  destroyed  or  much 
reduced,  and  Russia  was  one  of  the  greatest  of  the  powers 
of  Europe. 

The  third  of  the  Romanovs,  Peter  I  (1682-1725), 
sumamed  "The  Great,":;  was  regarded  afterward  as  the 
founder  of  modem  Russia.  He  centralized  his  govern- 
ment like  that  of  Louis  XIV  who  was  reigning  then;  re- 
formed his  army  so  as  to  make  it  like  that  which  the 
Prussian  rulers  were  developing;  and  completely  sub- 
ordinated the  Russian  Church  to  his  authority,  organizing 
it  imder  the  control  of  the  Holy  Synod,  afterward  one  of 
the  principal  means  of  upholding  the  autocracy  of  the 


RUSSIA,    1789-1881 


tsars.  Furthermore,  he  studied  the  civilization  of  western 
Europe,  and  strove  to  introduce  it  into  his  dominions. 
Since  he  ruled  over  a  vast  population  composed  mostly 
of  superstitious  and  ignorant  peasants,  he  was  able  to 
influence  only  the  upper  classes,  his  nobles  and  officials; 
and  after  his  time  foreigners  could  note  how  in  Russia 
most  of  the  population  had  the  uncut  hair  and  long 
beards,  the  eastern  dress  and  the  eastern  customs  which 
had  long  prevailed,  while  the  upper  class  resembled  in 
dress  and  habits  the  people  of  Germany  and  France. 
It  was  Peter  who  began  the  triumphant  march  of  Russian 
arms  to  the  west.  Much  of  his  reign  was  spent  in  suc- 
cessful war  against  the  Swedes.  By  the  Treaty  of  Nystad, 
in  1721,  Russia  acquired  provinces  from  Sweden  on  the 
south  shore  of  the  Baltic.  There  already,  in  1703,  the 
Tsar  had  founded  St.  Petersburg,  to  which  he  moved 
the  capital  from  Moscow.  Russia  now  extended  to  the 
Gulf  of  Riga,  and  she  had  her  first  good  outlet  on  the  sea 
and  her  first  good  opening  for  communication  with  west- 
ern Europe. 

The  forward  progress  was  continued  a  generation  later 
under  the  able  Tsarina,  Catherine  II  (1762-1796),  the 
Great.  First  she  attacked  the  crumbling  power  of  the 
Turks,  and,  after  many  victories,  forced  them,  in  the  Treaty 
of  Kuchuk  Kainarji,  in  1774,  to  give  up  territory  on  the 
northern  shore  of  the  Black  Sea  and  allow  Russians  free 
navigation  there  and  in  other  waters  under  Turkish  con- 
trol. All  the  country  to  the  north  of  the  Black  Sea  was 
soon  after  acquired  by  Russia. 

Next  Poland  was  destroyed.  The  Poles  were  a  brave, 
warlike  people,  but  they  had  made  little  political  or 
economic  progress  for  ages.  At  the  top  were  a  few  power- 
ful nobles;  beneath  them  the  bulk  of  the  population  in 
abject  serfdom.  In  Poland  the  worst  evils  and  abuses  of 
the  old  feudal  system  continued.  The  nobles  had  prac- 
tically independent  power,  and  the  liberum  veto,  by  which 


Russia 
reaches  the 
Baltic 


Catherine 
the  Great 


The 

Partitions 
of  Poland 


270 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Alexander   I 


The  Down- 
fall of 
Napoleon 


no  law  could  be  put  into  eflFect  if  any  noble  disapproved  it, 
paralyzed  the  weak  central  government.  At  the  end  of 
the  eighteenth  century,  surrounded  by  the  powerful 
states  of  Russia,  Austria,  and  Prussia,  she  could  go  on  in 
the  old  way  no  longer.  Under  the  leadership  of  Russia 
the  three  powers  conspired  to  divide  Poland  among 
them.  In  1772  they  cut  off  its  outlying  provinces.  This 
First  Partition  was  followed  by  a  Second  (1793)  and  a 
Third  (1795),  so  that  at  the  time  when  the  French  Revolu- 
tion was  bringing  a  new  era  to  the  peoples  of  western 
Europe,  the  unhappy  Poles  lost  their  country  and  their 
government,  and  passed  under  the  yoke  of  strangers. 
Most  of  what  had  been  Poland  now  became  part  of  Russia, 
so  that  Russia  extended  as  far  as  the  boundaries  of  the 
German  people. 

Russia,  now  one  of  the  principal  European  powers, 
took  an  important  part  against  France,  under  the  Direc- 
tory, and  then  against  the  Empire  of  Napoleon.  For  a 
while  after  the  defeat  of  the  Russians  at  Austerlitz  Tsar 
Alexander  I  (1801-1825)  entered  into  a  friendly  under- 
standing with  Napoleon,  and  for  a  few  years  the  Con- 
tinent was  practically  divided  between  Russia  and  France. 
With  Napoleon's  consent,  in  1809  the  Russians  took  Fin- 
land from  Sweden.  But  the  two  rulers  soon  drifted  apart. 
The  Russians  wished  to  continue  their  expansion  to  the 
southwest,  at  the  expense  of  the  Turks,  and  although  in 
1812,  by  the  Treaty  of  Bucharest,  they  obtained  Bes- 
sarabia, they  were  hampered  by  Napoleon,  who  did  not 
want  them  near  Constantinople,  the  most  important  posi- 
tion, so  he  thought,  in  the  world.  And  nowhere  were  the 
effects  of  his  Continental  System  more  onerous  than  they 
were  in  Russia,  almost  entirely  an  agricultural  country, 
and  compelled  to  buy  manufactures  abroad.  Accord- 
ingly, Alexander  partially  abandoned  the  Continental 
System,  and  war  followed  with  France.  It  was  in  this 
war  that  Napoleon,  compelled  to  retreat,  lost  nearly  all 


%'v. 


1-2.    MAP  TO  ILLUSTRATE  THE  HISTORY  OF  POLAND 


871 


«72 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Character  of 
Alexander  I 


Serfdom 
in  Russia 


of  his  army.  His  power,  now  seriously  shaken,  was 
destroyed  by  the  peoples  of  central  Europe,  helped  by  the 
Russians.  In  1814-15  Russia,  farthest  removed  from  the 
theater  of  the  war,  took  minor  part  in  the  fighting,  and 
at  the  end  of  the  struggle  was  less  exhausted  than  any 
of  the  other  contestants.  It  was  because  she  thus  had 
such  a  powerful  army  available,  and  because  of  her  reputa- 
tion for  invincibility  after  Napoleon's  retreat,  that  Alexan- 
der had  so  commanding  a  position  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna.  There  he  was  able  to  launch  his  Holy  Alliance, 
and  he  got  not  only  Finland  and  Bessarabia,  taken  in 
Napoleon's  time,  but  the  greater  part  of  Poland,  including 
Warsaw,  formerly  in  the  portion  held  by  Prussia. 

Alexander  I  desired  to  be  generous  and  enlightened; 
in  his  thoughts  and  his  theories  he  was  liberal  and,  for  a 
while  at  least,  in  his  foreign  policy  progressive.  It  was 
owing  to  his  desire  to  make  the  world  better  that  he 
proposed  the  Holy  Alliance,  to  bring  improved  relations 
between  the  sovereigns  and  avoid  future  wars.  At  the 
Congress  of  Vienna  he  seemed  the  most  liberal  statesman 
in  Europe.  He  it  was  who  insisted  that  moderate  terms 
should  be  granted  after  Waterloo,  when  some  Prussians 
wanted  the  French  killed  off  like  mad  dogs  and  their 
country  partitioned.  For  a  while  he  seemed  to  wish  to 
continue  the  liberal  work  of  the  French  Revolution.  In 
this  spirit  he  insisted  that  Louis  XVIII,  the  restored 
Bourbon  king  of  France,  should  give  to  his  subjects  some 
measure  of  constitutional  government;  and  he  himself 
allowed  independent  constitutions  to  his  Finnish  and  his 
Polish  subjects. 

In  his  vast  and  backward  realm  there  were  mighty 
problems  to  be  dealt  with.  First  and  greatest  was  the 
question  of  serfdom.  In  1815  the  population  of  the  em- 
pire was  about  forty-five  millions.  Of  these  less  than  a  mill- 
ion were  nobles;  substantially  there  was  no  bourgeoisie  or 
middle  class;  nearly  all  the  rest  were  peasants,  engaged 


RUSSIA,  1789-1881 


273 


in  agriculture.  Most  of  the  peasants,  as  in  Austria,  and 
the  Hungarian  and  the  Polish  lands,  were  serfs.  Like 
their  ancestors  had  been  for  hundreds  of  years,  they  were 
partly  unfree,  compelled  to  remain  on  the  estates  where 
they  were  born,  there  to  till  the  land  or  render  other  services, 
making  payments  to  the  noble  of  the  district  or  the  Tsar, 
and  working  for  him  some  of  the  days  of  the  week.  This 
serfdom  had  arisen  quite  naturally,  in  olden  times  and 
had  then  seemed  the  most  natural  and  proper  status  for 
most  of  the  people.  It  had  prevailed  almost  universally 
over  Europe,  and  had  lasted  in  central  Europe  as  well  as 
in  Russia  down  into  the  nineteenth  century.  In  some 
parts  of  western  Europe  it  had  long  since  passed  away, 
and  as  the  conditions  which  had  brought  it  to  an  end 
there — the  rise  of  the  cities,  new  industrial  and  economic 
methods,  and  a  different  spirit — gradually  extended  to 
Austria  and  Russia,  serfdom  was  more  and  more  felt  to 
be  no  longer  in  accordance  with  the  things  which  were 
right  and  best. 

The  Russian  peasants  were  organized  in  their  little 
agricultural  communities  much  as  the  English  villeins  had 
lived  on  the  manors  of  the  twelfth  and  the  thirteenth 
centuries.  In  primitive  times  almost  everywhere  the 
large  mass  of  the  people  had  been  grouped  together  in 
village  communities.  In  Russia  such  a  village,  or  mir 
(miru — union,  peace)  was  the  unit  of  peasant  life.  In  it 
the  peasants  chose  a  village  council  through  which  they 
regulated  their  local  concerns.  The  land  of  the  district 
was  divided  into  two  parts,  one  for  the  Tsar  or  noble,  who 
was  lord  of  the  district,  one  for  the  peasants.  The  land 
of  the  peasants  was  held  by  them  in  common,  and  was  ad- 
ministered by  the  mir;  for  it  they  made  payments  to  the 
lord.  The  other  part  they  cultivated  for  the  lord,  working 
for  him  a  certain  number  of  days  in  the  week.  This  was 
the  old  system  of  the  manor,  once  the  basis  of  economic 
organization  throughout  Eurt)pe,  but  now  gone  in  the 


Condition 
of  the 
peasants 


274 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  Tsar 
and   reform 


Alexander 
consenratiye 


Discontent 
in  Russia 


western  portion.  The  serfs  on  the  Tsar's  domain,  like 
the  villeins  long  before  on  the  King's  estates  in  England, 
were  not  badly  treated,  and,  considering  the  low  civiliza- 
tion of  the  country,  their  life  was  not  hard.  But  the 
nobles,  frequently  spendthrift  or  bankrupt,  often  took 
from  their  serfs  the  uttermost  penny,  or  sold  them  off 
like  cattle,  or  put  upon  them  exhausting  and  inhuman 
labor,  caring  nothing  about  them.  Nor  had  these  ser- 
vants and  peasants  any  redress.  In  1767  Catharine  II 
had  taken  from  them  all  legal  rights,  and  proclaimed 
the  harshest  punishment  for  those  who  complained  against 
their  masters.  After  that  time,  if  the  master  chose  so  to 
treat  them,  they  were  no  more  than  chattels  or  things. 

One  of  the  foremost  principles  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion had  been  the  equality  of  men,  and  one  of  the  great 
Revolutionary  reforms  had  been  the  abolition  of  such 
serfdom  as  remained.  But  Alexander,  who  had  just 
attempted  to  abolish  all  war,  and  who  had  striven  to 
effect  the  immediate  abolition  of  the  slave  trade,  found, 
as  is  often  the  case,  that  an  actual  reform  in  his  own  coun- 
try, was  more  diflScult  than  enouncing  general  principles 
for  mankind.  Furthermore,  after  a  short  time  he  ceased 
to  champion  liberalism  and  entered  on  a  course  of  reac- 
tion. 

Before  the  time  of  the  Congress  of  Vienna  he  had  un- 
dertaken some  small  reforms,  planned  a  system  of 
general  education,  and  considered  the  best  means  of 
abolishing  serfdom;  but  as  he  confronted  the  enormous 
mass  of  prejudice  and  ignorance  with  which  he  had  neces- 
sarily to  deal,  he  gradually  became  less  ardent;  and  when 
a  series  of  assassinations  and  uprisings  by  radicals  alarmed 
him,  he  fell  under  Metternich's  influence.  A  few  of  the 
serfs  in  the  Baltic  provinces  were  set  free,  but  this  was  all, 
and  liberal  progress  in  Russia  came  to  an  end  about  1818. 

The  later  years  of  Alexander's  reign  were  clouded  with 
gloom  and  disappointment.     Some  of  the  Russians  were 


RUSSIA,    1789-1881 


275 


hoping  for  better  things.  Soldiers,  especially  oflScers, 
who  had  served  against  France,  had  come  in  actual  con- 
tact with  French  civilization  and  the  liberal  ideas  of 
western  Europe,  and  when  they  returned  at  the  end  of  the 
wars  they  were  disheartened  because  of  the  conditions  in 
their  country.  At  first  there  were  high  hopes  of  reforms 
to  be  made  by  the  Tsar,  but  when  presently  it  was  seen 
that  he  would  do  little  and  that  he  had  joined  forces  with 
the  leading  reactionaries  of  Europe,  the  Russian  reformers, 
like  radicals  in  other  parts  of  Europe  then,  formed  secret 
revolutionary  societies  and  plotted  to  overturn  the 
government. 

In  1825  Alexander  died,  and  for  a  short  time  it  was 
uncertain  who  would  succeed  him.  After  three  weeks 
his  brother,  Nicholas,  ascended  the  throne,  but  mean- 
while the  discontented  had  planned  a  revolt,  which  now 
broke  out.  It  was  almost  immediately  suppressed,  for 
it  was  only  the  work  of  a  handful  of  liberal  reformers 
influenced  by  the  life  of  western  Europe,  and  had  no 
support  from  the  great  body  of  the  Russian  people.  This 
outbreak  took  place  in  December,  and  it  was  as  Decern- 
brists  that  the  leaders  were  afterward  remembered. 

Nicholas  I  (1825-1855),  who  ruled  Russia  now  for  a 
generation,  was  not  only  prejudiced  against  liberalism 
and  reform  by  the  events  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign, 
but  he  was  by  temperament  obstinately  and  narrowly 
conservative,  and  throughout  the  time  of  his  power  was 
resolutely  opposed  to  all  change.  In  his  opinion,  things 
in  Russia  were  better  than  anywhere  else  in  Europe. 
He  believed  that  autocracy  was  better  than  the  constitu- 
tional movements  which  had  led  to  change  and  dissolution 
in  other  countries,  and  he  determined  that  he  would  un- 
flinchingly uphold  the  old  system.  So  far  as  possible  he 
would  keep  out  of  his  dominions  every  trace  of  western 
influence  and  thought.  Therefore,  he  became  in  Russia 
the  steadfast  supporter  of  autocracy  and  the  age-old 


The  Decem- 
brist re- 
bellion, 1825 


Nicholas  I 


276 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Supports 
the  old  order 
in  Europe 


Repression 
in  Russia 


system,  which  the  French  Revolution  had  scarcely  af- 
fected, but  which  its  influence  now  threatened  to  disturb. 
Outside  of  Russia  he  was  the  great  champion  of  conserva- 
tism, of  reaction,  of  the  old  order,  of  resistance  to  any 
reform,  revolution  or  change.  This  period  was  after- 
ward known  as  Metternich's  Age,  and  the  Austrian 
statesman  was  the  foremost  leader  in  preventing  change 
and  upholding  things  as  they  were;  but  his  position  of 
leadership  resulted  less  from  what  he  was  able  to  do  than 
from  the  influence  of  his  character  upon  the  sovereigns  of 
his  time.  Actually  the  principal  instrument  in  preventing 
progress  and  causing  revolutions  to  fail  was  Nicholas  I 
of  Russia,  not  only  during  Metternich's  greatness,  but 
for  some  years  after  1848  when  the  Austrian  leader  had 
been  driven  from  power.  When  Charles  X  fled  from 
France  in  1830,  Nicholas  would  have  intervened  to 
restore  him  had  a  revolution  not  broken  out  in  Poland 
about  the  same  time;  and  in  1848  when  the  old  system 
was  finally  overthrown  in  western  Europe  and  seemed 
about  to  disappear  in  central  Europe  also,  Nicholas  hast- 
ened to  give  assistance  to  Austria.  It  was  his  intervention 
which  crushed  the  Hungarian  rebels. 

The  government  of  Nicholas  was  the  most  reactionary 
in  Europe.  Continuously  and  without  remorse  did  he 
suppress  every  attempt  of  his  subjects  to  have  any  freedom 
of  action  or  thought.  To  effect  this  purpose  an  organiza- 
tion of  terrible  eflBcacy  was  set  up.  In  1826  he  organized 
a  secret  police  service  under  the  direction  of  the  Third 
Section  of  the  Tsar's  Private  Chancellery ^  which  after  a  while 
got,  in  and  outside  of  Russia,  as  ominous  and  evil  a  renown 
as  the  Spanish  Inquisition  so  long  had.  At  the  head 
of  the  Third  Section,  and  responsible  only  to  the  Tsar, 
was  a  chief  of  police,  with  unlimited  power  to  arrest, 
imprison,  send  out  of  the  country,  or  even  get  rid  of, 
any  one,  without  any  hindrance  except  for  his  own  dis- 
cretion.    This  device  was  accompanied  by  severe  regula- 


hne 


13.    THE 


PIRE  IN  1914 


}  ,^-.^._,^. 


i 


mi 


RUSSIA,   1789-1881 


277 


tions.  Few  Russians  were  allowed  to  travel  abroad,  so 
the  people  were  kept  from  the  contaminating  influence 
of  other  countries;  a  strict  censorship  excluded  nearly 
all  foreign  publications  and  made  it  impossible  to  publish 
in  the  Russian  press  foreign  ideas  for  the  few  Russians  who 
could  read;  attendance  at  universities  was  discouraged, 
and  part  of  the  teaching  was  put  altogether  under  control 
of  the  Church.  All  this  was  enforced  by  the  activities  of 
the  secret  police,  who  hunted  down  those  who  would  take 
and  spread  about  liberal  and  foreign  doctrines,  putting 
them  out  of  the  way  or  sending  them  to  Siberia  without 
trial. 

For  a  while  what  was  sought  was  attained.  Western 
ideas  did  not  come  in.  There  was  the  vast,  immobile 
calm  of  China;  things  went  on  as  before.  There  was  al- 
most no  effort  to  get  reform  or  even  to  preach  it;  the  peo- 
ple were  without  leaders,  and  remained  in  lethargy  and 
dullness.  When  the  Revolution  of  1848  overturned 
European  governments  from  Paris  to  Vienna,  Russia  went 
through  the  year  unaffected 

In  one  part,  indeed,  there  was  a  despairing  effort  at 
revolution.  In  1815,  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  Alexan- 
der I  had  succeeded  in  getting  most  of  the  Grand  Duchy 
of  Warsaw,  which  Napoleon  had  constructed  out  of  the 
Polish  territory  which  he  took  from  Austria  and  Prussia. 
This  territory  Alexander  had  made  into  the  Kingdom  of 
Poland,  not  to  be  a  part  of  Russia,  but  united  with  Russia 
in  that  the  Tsar  was  to  be  its  king.  It  embraced  only  a 
sixth  of  the  former  Polish  kingdom  and  contained  but 
three  million  inhabitants;  but  it  was  the  most  visible  relic 
of  the  former  state  and  did  contain  the  old  capital,  War- 
saw. In  this  country  Alexander  had  begun  with  some 
of  the  reforms  which  he  seemed  desirous  of  introducing 
into  Russia  later  on.  In  1815  he  granted  the  Poles  a 
constitution,  by  which  they  were  to  have  a  legislature,  or 
Diet,  with  considerable  powers,  the  members  being  chosen 


The  Old 

Regime 
continues 
in  Russia 


The  King- 
dom of 
Poland 


278 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Privileges 
withdrawn 


The  Polish 
Rebellion 
of  1830 


by  an  electorate  wider  than  either  England  or  France  then 
had.  Pohsh  was  to  be  the  official  language,  and  there  was 
to  be  liberty  of  press  and  religion.  The  result  of  all  this 
was  that  the  Poles  got  freer  institutions  than  the  surround- 
ing peoples  of  Russia,  Prussia,  or  Austria  had  at  this  time. 

But  this  did  not  last  long.  When  the  Poles  attempted 
to  make  use  of  the  powers  which  Alexander  had  so  freely 
granted,  he  was  alarmed.  Events  elsewhere  in  Europe 
were  steadily  bringing  him  under  Metternich's  influence. 
Moreover,  the  freedom  given  to  the  Poles  was  regarded 
with  disfavor  by  Russians,  some  of  whom  disapproved  it, 
while  the  rest  repined  because  more  had  been  given  to  the 
Poles  than  to  themselves.  Accordingly,  in  1820,  when  the 
Polish  Diet  rejected  a  measure  proposed  by  the  govern- 
ment, Alexander  changed  the  constitution  and  took  away 
much  of  the  freedom  given  five  years  before. 

The  Poles  now  yearned  to  throw  off  the  Russian  yoke. 
Under  Nicholas  I  the  weight  of  oppression  increased. 
Then  came  the  Revolution  of  1830  in  France,  with  its 
influence  on  peoples  more  remote.  Particularly  did  this 
influence  react  upon  the  Poles,  between  whom  and  the 
French  there  were  traditional  and  long-standing  sympathy 
and  attachment.  Therefore,  in  November  1830  a  mutiny 
broke  out  in  Warsaw,  and  the  Poles  rising  in  rebellion, 
appealed  to  other  peoples  for  aid.  But  the  rebellion  was 
hopeless  from  the  start.  No  aid  came  from  outside,  and 
the  country,  which  is  part  of  the  far-extending  plain,  had 
no  strong  natural  frontiers  and  made  no  obstacle  to  the 
invader's  advance.  The  revolutionists  fought  bravely, 
but  were  soon  crushed,  and  the  Russian  government,  in 
taking  its  revenge,  resolved  to  make  another  revolution 
impossible.  The  constitution  was  abolished,  and  Poland 
was  made  part  of  Russia.  Many  of  the  leaders  were  put 
to  death  or  sent  into  exile,  and  the  country  was  occupied 
with  a  Russian  army. 

After  that  year  throughout  the  Tsar's  dominions  there 


RUSSIA,    1789-1881 


279 


was  the  quietness  which  he  so  greatly  cherished.  Those 
who  were  troublesome  or  restless  were  suppressed  silently 
and  at  once.  The  censorship  was  constantly  made  more 
severe.  Punishments  became  harder.  The  activity  of  the 
secret  police  never  waned.  In  the  course  of  twenty  years,  it 
is  thought,  about  a  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  persons 
were  dispatched  to  Siberia.  It  was  diflScult  to  get  passports 
for  foreign  travel;  it  was  difficult  for  foreigners  to  travel  in 
Russia.  So  there  were  in  all  parts  of  the  vast  domain  what 
Nicholas  thought  were  the  goodness  and  the  order  that 
Heaven  had  ordained,  but  what  really  were  stagnation  and 
decay. 

Actually  the  administration  and  the  government  be- 
came constantly  more  corrupt  and  inefficient,  successful 
only  in  holding  down  the  people.  All  initiative  was 
crushed,  all  progress  made  impossible.  While  the  rest 
of  Europe  was  being  slowly  transformed,  Russia  remained 
unaffected.  The  people  had  no  control  over  any  part  of 
their  government,  except  the  smallest  local  concerns, 
and  the  officials  who  governed  them,  and  who  were  ap- 
pointed from  above,  usually  got  their  positions  by  pur- 
chase, and,  being  paid  no  salaries,  lived  upon  bribes  and 
exa^ctions.  Sometimes  they  made  fortunes  by  wringing 
money  from  the  wretched  people,  much  like  the  procon- 
suls of  the  later  Roman  Republic.  The  public  funds  were 
constantly  stolen.  It  was  impossible  to  get  justice  in  any 
court  without  bribing  the  judges.  There  was  no  one  to 
whom  the  people  could  complain.  The  Russian  people 
themselves  understood  something  of  the  miserable  condi- 
tion of  affairs,  but  they  were  sunk  in  apathy  and  ignor- 
ance, and  knew  no  means  of  redress.  Furthermore, 
the  prestige  for  military  greatness,  which  had  come  from 
the  long  career  of  success  against  Sweden,  Poland  and 
Turkey,  and  especially  from  the  destruction  of  Napo- 
leon's power,  remained  undiminished.  Abroad  the  Rus- 
sian army  was  believed  to  be  far  stronger  than  it  actually 


Nicholas 
long  suc- 
cessful in 
Russia 


Inefficiency 

and 

corruption 


280  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

was;  at  home  the  people  thought  with  much  pride  of  the 
power  and  majesty  of  their  ruler.  Actually,  however,  the 
military  organization  was  as  poor  and  corrupt  as  the  civil 
government.  All  this  became  evident  in  the  disasters  of 
the  Crimean  War,  and  the  results  brought  disillusionment 
and  discontent  which  could  not  any  longer  be  ignored. 
Russia  and  Hitherto  Russia's  progress  westward  had  been  attended 

Turkey  ^j^-j^  great  success.     The  Swedes  had  been  driven  across 

the  Baltic  back  to  the  Scandinavian  peninsula;  Poland 
had  disappeared.  In  these  directions,  however,  not  much 
further  advance  could  be  expected,  since  Russia's  frontiers 
now  touched  the  powerful  states  of  Austria  and  Prussia. 
To  the  southwest  it  was  different.  Already  much  gain 
had  been  made  from  the  Turk,  and  the  decaying  power 
of  the  Ottoman  Empire  seemed  to  invite  further  aggress- 
ion. Russian  rulers  had  long  hoped  that  some  day  they 
might  annex  the  Balkan  provinces,  largely  inhabited  by 
kindred  Slavs,  and  then,  pressing  on,  take  Constantinople. 
Even  in  the  minds  of  the  simple  and  ignorant  Russian  pea- 
sants there  was  some  idea  of  getting  this  city  from  which 
their  religion  once  had  come,  and  some  yearning  for  the 
greatness  which  they  believed  would  follow.  Alexander  I 
had  hoped  to  obtain  it  when  he  made  the  secret  treaty 
with  Napoleon  at  Tilsit;  but  Napoleon  had  answered, 
"Never!  That  would  be  the  mastery  of  the  world." 
Nicholas  II  cherished  the  same  purpose,  and  tried  to  come 
"The  Sick  to  an  understanding  with  the  British  government.  "We 
Man  of  the  have  on  our  hands  a  sick  man,"  he  told  the  British  am- 
bassador in  1853,  "a  very  sick  man.  It  will  be  a  great 
misfortune  if,  one  of  these  days,  he  should  slip  away  from 
us  before  the  necessary  arrangements  have  been  made." 
And  he  suggested  that  the  powers  agree  about  the  division 
of  Turkish  possessions.  Nothing  came  of  the  proposal, 
for  Britain,  always  fearful  of  the  appearance  on  the 
Mediterranean  of  a  strong  state  which  might  threaten 
her  own  power  there,  stood  by  Turkey,  as  she  did  later  on. 


East" 


RUSSIA,  1789-1881 


281 


in  1878.  Nicholas,  however,  went  on  with  his  designs, 
and  presently  raised  up  against  him  both  England  and 
France. 

The  fundamental  cause  of  the  Crimean  War  was  fear 
that  Russia  might  seize  the  territory  and  possessions  of 
the  Turk.  In  June  1853,  Russia  demanded  that  the  Sul- 
tan recognize  her  right  to  protect  all  the  Greek  Christians 
in  the  Ottoman  Empire.  When  this  was  refused,  she 
sent  troops  into  the  Danubian  principalities,  afterward 
Rumania,  and  war  began  between  Russia  and  Turkey. 
A  far  greater  conflict  followed  with  Great  Britain  and 
France. 

The  war  was  very  disastrous  to  the  reputation  of  all 
the  contestants,  but  especially  to  that  of  Russia.  The 
principal  effort  of  the  allies  was  against  Russia's  great 
naval  base  at  Sevastopol,  in  the  Crimea,  her  most  im- 
portant position  on  the  Black  Sea.  They  effected  a  land- 
ing, and  won  some  battles,  and  began  the  investment  of 
the  fortress,  but  there  had  been  too  much  delay  and  the 
defences  had  been  wonderfully  strengthened  by  the  great 
Russian  military  engineer,  Todleben.  The  English  and 
the  French  battered  the  fortifications  with  powerful 
artillery,  but  their  forces  were  insuflScient  to  surround 
the  city,  and  scarcely  enough  even  for  the  work  of  the 
siege,  so  that  during  the  winter  of  1854-5  they  suffered 
horribly  and  accomplished  little.  But  meanwhile  the 
Russians  suffered  no  less.  Their  great  armies,  assembled 
to  drive  the  invader  into  the  sea,  fell  to  pieces  on  the 
march,  and  most  of  those  who  struggled  on  were  without 
supplies  and  equipment.  The  people  were  patriotic,  and 
militia  regiments  were  everywhere  raised,  but  the  funds 
to  support  the  soldiers  were  shamelessly  stolen.  In 
September  1855,  after  a  memorable  siege,  Sevastopol  was 
taken.  Soon  after,  Russia,  approaching,  as  it  seemed  then, 
near  to  her  ruin,  made  peace.  For  the  present  her  military 
reputation  was  gone;  and  the  wrath  of  the  people  at  the 


Causes  of 
the  Crimean 
War 


The 

Crimean 
War,  1854-6 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Alexander 

n 


Abolition 
serfdom, 
1859-66 


maladministration  and  repression  in  their  country,  now 
burst  forth  the  more  wildly  because  it  had  slumbered  so 
long.  In  the  midst  of  the  struggle  Nicholas  I  had  died, 
broken  in  spirit  at  the  collapse  of  his  greatness.  His 
successor  was  a  man  of  very  different  character  and  inten- 
tions, and  evidently  a  new  era  was  at  hand. 

Alexander  II  (1855-1881)  was  a  man  of  humane  and 
liberal  disposition.  At  once  he  reversed  the  policy  of  his 
father.  He  allowed  such  of  the  exiled  Decembrists  as 
were  still  alive  to  return  to  Russia,  and  pardoned  other 
political  offenders.  The  universities  were  given  freedom 
again,  and  Russians  allowed  to  travel  abroad.  Ardent 
and  enthusiastic  people  now  believed  that  all  the  ills  of 
Russia  would  be  cured, 
of  At  once  Alexander  turned  to  the  great  problem  waiting 
to  be  solved.  Serfdom  had  already  been  abolished  in 
Poland,  and  there  were  many  free  peasants  in  the  north 
and  the  Cossacks  in  the  south,  but  over  most  of  the  Rus- 
sian Empire  serfdom  prevailed.  He  began  by  freeing  the 
twenty-three  million  serfs  on  the  royal  domain  or  crown 
lands.  They  had  a  much  better  position  than  any  of  the 
others,  being  practically  free  and  merely  owing  to  the  Tsar 
payments  which  were  the  equivalent  of  rent.  Whenever 
he  wished,  he  could  declare  them  free,  proclaim  that  they 
were  the  owners  of  the  lands  they  had  formerly  cul- 
tivated under  the  crown,  and  abolish  the  dues  they  had 
previously  paid.  In  1859  this  was  begun  and  the  process 
was  complete  seven  years  later.  Meanwhile  he  was 
busy  persuading  the  nobles  not  to  resist  the  freeing  of  their 
serfs  also.  The  change  was  bound  to  come  to  pass,  he 
told  them,  and  it  was  much  better  that  it  be  granted  from 
above  than  forced  by  revolution  from  below.  The  noble- 
men made  no  determined  resistance,  and  in  March  1861 
an  Edict  of  Emancipation  was  proclaimed  which  abolished 
all  serfdom  in  the  empire,  thus  emancipating  the  twenty- 
six  million  serfs  of  private  owners.     This  edict  was  of 


lak.. 


RUSSIA,   1789-1881 


283 


immense  importance  in  the  history  of  the  freedom  of  the 
human  race.  By  no  legislation  had  so  many  people  ever 
before  been  made  free.  It  brought  serfdom  in  Europe  to 
an  end.  Thereafter  of  the  status  of  servitude  there  was 
very  little  left  anywhere  in  the  world,  except  for  the  four 
million  negroes  held  as  slaves  in  the  southern  common- 
wealths of  the  United  States. 

In  England  serfdom  had  disappeared  gradually,  as  the 
result  of  the  working  of  economic  causes.  This  was  mostly 
the  case  also  in  France,  for  when  serfdom  was  formally 
abolished  there  in  1789,  most  of  the  peasants  were  already 
free.  In  Russia  now,  as  was  the  case  in  the  United  States 
two  years  later,  the  unfree  population  was  being  freed 
almost  at  a  stroke.  In  Russia  this  would  be  very  apt  to 
bring  about  considerable  dislocation  and  confusion,  a$ 
indeed  it  did  in  the  United  States,  for  society  was  being 
altered  not  by  gradual  development,  but  artificially,  by 
law.  In  the  Southern  States  of  America  the  enfranchised 
negroes,  made  completely  free,  sank  back  after  a  while, 
many  of  them,  into  a  condition  of  economic  servitude, 
from  which  the  utmost  efforts  of  their  Northern  friends 
could  not  save  them,  and  from  which  they  have  only 
gradually  and  in  part  escaped  after  many  years  when  they 
have  been  able  to  get  the  ownership  of  some  of  the  land. 
In  England  the  decline  of  serfdom  had  made  many  villeins 
free,  then  driven  them  away  from  the  land  which  they  had 
cultivated,  and  often  reduced  them  to  a  worse  economic 
position  than  before.  This  the  Russian  government  now 
strove  to  avert.  Not  only  were  the  old  services  abolished, 
but  to  the  free  peasants  was  given  that  portion  of  the  land 
which  formerly  they  had  cultivated,  that  is  to  say,  a  part 
of  what  had  belonged  to  the  nobles  or  the  crown.  For 
the  most  part  the  ownership  of  this  property  was  vested 
not  in  the  individual  peasants,  but,  in  accordance  with 
communal  ideas  which  had  long  prevailed  in  Russia,  in  the 
village  communities  or  mirs.     The  former  owners  were 


Method  of 
the  emanci- 
pation 


284 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Results  of 
emancipa- 
tion 


Judicial 

system 

reformed 


to  be  paid  by  the  communes,  to  whom  the  government 
would  advance  the  money  necessary  for  this,  the  com- 
munes for  forty-nine  years  to  pay  back  to  the  government 
six  per  cent  of  the  amount  thus  advanced. 

Emancipation  involved  less  alteration  than  might  have 
been  expected.  It  conferred  on  the  peasants  the  status 
of  free  men  and  women;  but  it  did  not  make  much  change 
in  the  condition  of  most  of  the  peasants,  and  doubtless 
nothing  could  have  produced  much  difference  in  any  short 
time.  They  had  formerly  cultivated  land,  for  which  they 
made  payments  and  rendered  service;  now  they  cultivated 
the  same  land,  of  which  they  collectively  were  owners, 
but  for  which  they  had  to  make  yearly  payments  never- 
theless. The  peasants  were  bitterly  disappointed.  They 
had  long  hoped  that  some  day  the  lands  on  which  they 
lived  would  be  given  to  them  free  of  any  encumbrance. 
Furthermore,  with  the  rapidly  increasing  population  of 
Russia  it  became  more  and  more  evident  in  the  years 
which  followed  that  not  enough  land  had  been  given. 
Most  of  them  continued  to  live  in  very  abject  pov- 
erty, and  in  ignorance  and  filth.  The  peasants  now 
began  to  hope  for  a  day  when  more  of  the  lands  that 
remained  to  the  nobles  and  the  crown  might  be  given  to 
them.  Only  so  would  such  benefits  result  as  gradually 
came  to  the  peasantry  of  France  from  the  French  Revo- 
lution. 

Other  great  reforms  followed.  In  1864  the  Russian 
judicial  system  was  radically  changed,  in  accordance  with 
principles  long  before  gradually  developed  in  western 
Europe.  Judges  were  made  independent;  jury  trial  was 
introduced;  judicial  and  administrative  powers  were 
separated,  and  a  system  of  courts  established,  with  appeal 
from  the  lower  to  the  higher.  The  vast  mass  of  petty 
cases,  which  in  all  countries  always  make  up  the  bulk  of 
judicial  business,  were  now  to  be  handled  in  Russia  by 
justices,  elected  by  the  people  of  the  locality. 


RUSSIA,   1789-1881 


^85 


In  the  same  year  also  a  decree  of  the  Tsar  established  a 
greater  measure  of  local  self-government.  In  their  pet- 
tiest concerns  the  peasants  had  some  self-government 
in  the  village  commmiities  or  mirs,  but  this  was  all.  Rus- 
sia was  already  divided  into  thirty -four  "governments" 
which  were  composed  of  provinces  and  districts.  Self- 
government  was  now  given  in  these  larger  administrative 
divisions,  the  provinces  and  districts.  Each  of  these 
sub-divisions  was  to  have  an  assembly,  zemstvo,  made  up 
of  the  large  landed  proprietors  of  the  district,  and  of 
delegates  indirectly  elected  by  the  peasants  and  people  of 
the  towns.  Substantially,  the  nobles,  the  peasants,  and 
the  bourgeoisie  were  represented  in  the  zemstvos.  The 
district  council  or  zemstvo,  was  to  be  elected  by  the  people 
of  the  locality;  the  district  councils  themselves  were  to 
choose  the  members  of  the  provincial  zemstvos.  These 
coimcils  were  to  impose  the  local  taxes  and  make  the  local 
regulations,  which  were  to  be  carried  out  by  standing  com- 
mittees. In  1870  dumasy  or  councils,  were  established 
in  the  Russian  cities,  the  members  being  elected  according 
to  the  Prussian  three  class  system,  by  the  citizens  in  pro- 
portion to  their  wealth. 

Other  changes  were  made,  and  it  seemed  that  much 
improvement  must  result,  but  disappointment  and  re- 
action soon  clouded  the  prospect.  The  Russian  liberals 
were  at  first  filled  with  all  sorts  of  pent-up  hopes.  Some 
of  them  were  idealists  and  enthusiasts  who  had  no  real 
conception  of  the  difficulties  besetting  any  program  of 
reform  in  the  country,  weighed  down  as  it  must  be  by  the 
dead  hand  of  centuries  of  ignorance  and  oppression  gone 
before.  Only  very  gradually  could  the  lot  of  the  Russian 
people  be  changed  by  any  reforms.  Hence  the  first 
boundless  hopes  were  soon  disappointed.  The  peasants 
saw  little  difference  between  their  former  position  and 
that  in  which  emancipation  now  placed  them.  The 
liberals  and  the   radicals  were  grieved  that  conditions 


Local 

government 

reformed 


Disappoint- 
ment in 
Russia 


^86 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


iUezander 

tecomes 

conservative 


Rebellion 
of  the 
Poles,  1863 


in  Russia  were  not  speedily  made  like  what  they  knew  of 
in  England  and  France.  Furthermore,  the  reforms  which 
had  been  made  could  not  be  well  administered  at  first. 
Local  government  could  not  be  very  efficient  until  there 
had  been  a  time  of  training  and  experience,  and  the  new 
courts  could  not  give  fair  and  cheap  justice  until  upright 
and  capable  judges  could  be  procured. 

Alexander  himself  changed  also.  It  is  said  that  he  was 
not  really  a  liberal,  but  one  who  believed  that  changes 
were  inevitable,  and  preferred  to  make  them  while  there 
was  time.  Furthermore,  he  was  surrounded  by  re- 
actionary officials,  who  had  grown  up  in  the  reign  pre- 
ceding. In  course  of  time  their  influence  was  felt.  And 
finally,  in  1863,  came  another  rebellion  of  the  Poles,  after 
which  the  Tsar  soon  ceased  making  changes. 

It  was  another,  despairing  effort  of  the  Poles  to  win 
freedom.  The  spirit  of  nationality,  which  was  rising 
again  strongly  in  Europe,  had  reached  certain  classes  of 
this  people.  The  Italians  had  just  achieved  their  imity, 
and  the  Germans  were  about  to  make  a  united  nation. 
Now  Polish  patriots  began  to  dream  of  a  free  Polish  nation 
once  more.  Moreover,  the  Tsar  had  made  some  conces- 
sions, enough  to  raise  expectations,  but  less  than  what 
they  desired.  Suddenly  an  insurrection  broke  out.  The 
Poles  appealed  to  the  free  nations  of  Europe  for  assistance, 
and  much  sympathy  was  aroused  in  England  and  France, 
and  elsewhere.  But  actually  the  movement  was  never 
formidable.  The  Prussian  government  offered  help  to 
the  Tsar,  but  this  was  not  needed.  The  Polish  population 
generally  remained  passive.  Through  long  previous 
centuries  this  peasantry  had  been  bowed  under  the  most 
degrading  serfdom,  in  hopeless  poverty,  without  attach- 
ment to  the  masters  who  oppressed  them,  and  without 
any  feeling  of  patriotism  for  a  state  which  did  nothing 
for  them.  Therefore  now  they  looked  on  with  indifference, 
having  not  yet  learned  to  care  enough  for  Poland,  and 


RUSSIA,   1789-^1881  287 

caring  little  who  were  their  masters.  When  rebeUion  was 
crushed  the  Russian  government  took  measures  to  crush 
permanently  the  power  of  those  who  had  made  it.  The 
monasteries  of  the  religious  orders  were  suppressed  and 
their  lands  taken  away  from  them.  About  half  of  the 
lands  of  the  nobility  was  taken  and  given  to  the  peasants, 
so  as  to  make  them  friendly  to  the  Russian  government. 
These  lands  were  to  be  paid  for,  but  by  a  tax  not  only  on 
the  possessions  of  the  peasants  but  on  those  of  the  nobles 
as  well.  The  results  of  this  were  important.  The.  in- 
fluence of  the  upper  classes,  among  whom  the  spirit  of 
Polish  nationality  had  been  strongest,  was  crippled. 
Furthermore  the  condition  of  the  Polish  lower  classes  was 
improved,  and,  contrary  to  what  was  sometimes  believed 
in  other  parts  of  the  world,  the  economic  condition  of  most 
of  the  Polish  people  under  Russia  was  better  than  in 
Galicia,  where  the  Austrian  government  had  done  little  to 
interfere  with  the  privileges  of  the  Polish  nobles  but  where 
the  peasants  continued  in  low  degradation.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Russian  government,  resolving  to  make  a  Russian 
province  out  of  Poland,  now  forbade  the  use  of  the  Polish 
language  in  any  government  business,  in  university  lec- 
tures, in  newspapers,  in  theaters,  in  schools,  and  in  churches. 
Against  this  the  Polish  people  made  vigorous  resistance, 
and  in  the  struggle  that  ensued  the  spirit  of  nationality 
was  strongly  awakened  at  last  in  the  hearts  of  the 
people. 

Some  of  Alexander's  reforms  were  put  into  effect  after  Discontent 
this  time,  but  he  now  became  conservative  and  suspicious, 
for  he  had  begun  to  feel  that  autocracy  might  be  weak- 
ened by  further  concessions.  Discontent  increased.  Not 
enough  had  been  done,  and  expectation  was  aroused  by 
what  had  been  granted.  Moreover,  the  mere  passage  of 
time  and  the  changes  going  on  elsewhere  created  greater  de- 
mands. So,  in  the  despair  that  now  came  to  the  liberals, 
violence  and  extreme  radicalism  took  the  place  of  a  pro- 


mcreases 


288  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

gressive  liberal  movement.     Nihilists,  extreme  socialists, 
and  terrorists  supplanted  the  liberal  reformers. 
The  The  term  nihilist  {nihil,  nothing)  is  said  to  have  been 

'**^^^**  first  used  by  Turgeniev  in  his  novel.  Fathers  and  Sons, 

published  in  1862,  to  signify  one  who  accepted  nothing 
without  critical  examination,  nothing  on  authority  merely. 
It  was  soon  applied  in  Russia  to  intellectuals  who  accepted 
nothing  in  Russia  as  good,  contrasting  what  they  saw  there 
with  conditions  in  other  countries.  They  accepted 
neither  the  autocratic  government,  nor  the  Greek  Catholic 
faith  of  their  fathers.  Turgeniev  described  his  character 
as  one  who  beUeved  that  there  was  no  institution  which 
ought  not  to  be  destroyed  completely  and  at  once.  What 
was,  ought  to  be  overthrown,  in  order  to  construct  society 
anew.  At  first  all  this  was  merely  held  by  intellectuals, 
who  talked  about  it,  but  were  not  prepared  to  go  further. 
After  a  few  years,  however,  it  was  translated  into  action. 
About  1871  there  was  a  great  stirring  in  the  minds  of 
economic  radicals  in  Europe.  The  Commune  of  Paris 
had  just  attempted  to  institute  a  new  social  and  political 
order,  and  even  its  failure  had  attracted  much  atten- 
tion. The  socialism  of  western  Europe  was  beginning 
to  have  its  effect  upon  Russian  thinkers,  and,  more  impor- 
tant still,  the  doctrines  of  violence  which  the  anarchists 
taught. 
The  Active  anarchism  had  been  largely  developed  by  the 

anarchists  Russian  Bakunin.  He  believed  that  capitalism  and 
autocratic  government  ought  to  be  destroyed  through 
violence,  and,  where  this  was  not  possible,  through  secret 
assassination  and  terror.  Now  in  Russia,  when  the  efforts 
of  the  peaceful  radicals  were  checked  by  the  government, 
and  many  were  punished  or  sent  into  exile,  the  move- 
ment of  reform  and  oppositipn — after  changing  into  ni- 
hilism, a  doctrine  held  by  philosophers  and  students,  and 
then  into  socialist  propaganda — got  into  the  hands  of  the 
anarchists,  who  attempted  to  create  a  reign  of  terror,  and 


RUSSIA,   1789-1881 


^89 


paralyze  the  government,  or  at  least  take  vengeance  on 
their  oppressors. 

An  attempt  had  been  made  to  assassinate  the  Tsar  in 
1866.  Thereafter  he  hearkened  more  than  ever  to  the 
reactionaries,  and  in  the  ten  years  after  the  Polish  revolt 
a  great  number  of  people  were  sent  to  Siberia.  In  1878 
a  secret  committee  was  established  at  St.  Petersburg  to 
carry  on  war  against  the  government.  Literature  was 
printed  for  secret  distribution,  and  bombs  were  manu- 
factured for  the  assassination  of  oflScials.  In  a  short  time 
prominent  oflScials  were  done  to  death  by  members  of  the 
society,  and  renewed  attempts  had  been  made  to  kill  the 
Tsar.  Martial  law  was  proclaimed,  and  a  minister  was 
appointed  with  the  fullest  powers  of  a  dictator.  In  1881 
the  Tsar,  yielding  somewhat,  gave  his  consent  that  a 
general  commission,  partly  representative,  should  be 
summoned  to  consult  about  reforms.  But  on  the  day 
that  this  decree  was  signed,  a  fourth  attempt  was  made  to 
assassinate  him,  and  he  was  blown  to  pieces  by  a  bomb 
hurled  as  he  was  passing  through  the  streets.  Thus  per- 
ished the  Tsar  Liberator,  author  of  the  most  important 
reform  made  in  Russia  for  generations,  victim  very  largely 
of  the  conditions  which  older  times  had  bequeathed  to 
him.  The  Terrorists  at  once  published  a  manifesto  in 
which  they  promised  to  cease  their  activities,  if  freedom 
of  speech,  of  the  press,  and  of  meeting,  was  allowed  in 
Russia,  and  if  a  national  assembly  was  elected  by  man- 
hood suffrage.  But  their  deed  was  about  to  usher  in  a 
period  of  sterner  and  more  terrible  reaction,  and  when  at 
last  changes  were  made  in  Russia,  they  were  to  come,  as 
in  France,  not  through  constitutional  amendment  but 
through  destruction  of  the  old  system,  by  revolution. 


Assassina- 
tion of 
Alexander  II 


«90  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General  r  it  is  more  difficult  to  make  a  satisfactory  bibliogra- 
phy about  Russia  because  a  great  part  of  the  best  historical 
writing  about  her  is  in  the  Russian  language,  and  many  of  the 
works  have  not  been  translated —  R.  J.  Kerner,  Slavic  Europe: 
a  Selected  Bibliography  in  the  Western  European  Languages  (1919) ; 
Sir  D.  M.  Wallace,  Russia  (ed.  1912),  the  best  to  give  the  begin- 
ner an  acquaintance  with  the  Russian  people  and  their  life.  For 
the  history :  Raymond  Beazley,  Nevill  Forbes,  and  G.  A.  Birkett, 
Russia,  from  the  Varangians  to  the  Bolsheviks  (1918),  the  best 
recent  account  in  English;  Alfred  Rambaud,  Histoire  de  la 
Russie  depuis  les  Origines  jusqu  a  Nos  Jours  (6th  ed.  completed 
to  1913  by  E.  Haumant),  3  vols.  (1914),  English  translation, 
8  vols.  (1881),  the  best  history  of  Russia;  A.  Kornilov  (English 
trans,  by  A.  S.  Kaun),  Modern  Russian  History,  %  vols.  (1917); 
James  Mavor,  An  Economic  History  of  Russia,  2  vols.  (1914), 
best  economic  history;  W.  R.  A.  MorfiU,  History  of  Russia  from 
the  Birth  of  Peter  the  Great  to  the  Death  of  Alexander  II  (1902); 
F.  H.  Skrine,  The  Expansion  of  Russia  (3d  ed.,  1915). 

Particular  periods:  Grand  Duke  Nicholas  Mikhallovitch, 
VEmpereur  Alexandre  I'\  2  vols.  (1913);  T.  Schiemann, 
Geschichte  Russlands  unter  Kaiser  Nikolaus  I,  4  vols.  (1904-19); 
H.  G.  Samson  von  Himmelstjerna  (English  trans,  by  J.  Morri- 
son), Russia  under  Alexander  III  and  in  the  Preceding  Period 
(1893) ;  Alphons  Thun,  Geschichte  der  Revolutiondren  Bewegungen 
in  Russland  (1883). 

Russian  government  and  institutions:  Wiatscheslaw  Gribow- 
ski.  Das  Staatsrecht  des  Russischen  Reiches  (1912);  Maxime 
Kovalevsky,  Modem  Customs  and  Ancient  Laws  of  Russia  (1891), 
Russian  Political  Institutions  (1902),  excellent,  scholarly  ac- 
counts. 

Poland:  E.  H.  Lewinski-Corwin,  The  Political  History  of 
Poland  (1917),  best  account  in  English;  W.  A.  Phillips,  Poland 
(1915). 


CHAPTER  XIII 
THE  LESSER  PEOPLES 

K  this  is  the  day  of  great  Empires  it  is  also  preeminently  the  day 
of  little  nations.     .     .     .     Their  destiny  is  interwoven  with  that 
of  humanity. 
Speech  of  Mr.  Lloyd  George  at  Birkenhead,  September  6, 1917 

In  any  brief  account  of  Europe  since  1789  attention 
can  be  given  only  to  the  most  important  things  which 
affected  the  European  peoples,  or  else  to  the  history  of  the 
greater  powers.  But  the  student  should  remember  that 
during  all  the  time  that  mightier  events  were  transpiring, 
there  were  lesser  nations  living  their  lives,  taking  part 
in  the  great  things  around  them  or  beholding  them  from 
aside,  as  spectators.  All  through  the  nineteenth  century 
Portugal  and  Spain,  Switzerland,  Belgium,  and  Holland, 
Denmark,  Norway,  and  Sweden,  and  the  peoples  of  the 
Balkans,  were  making  a  history  of  their  own,  important 
to  themselves  and  interesting  enough.  The  history  of  the 
Balkans  can  be  told  better  in  the  second  part  of  this  book, 
since  in  the  latter  part  of  the  period,  the  destiny  of  the 
Balkan  peoples  was  intertwined  with  greater  affairs,  and 
with  the  causes  leading  to  the  gigantic  struggle  which 
brought  the  period  to  an  end.  What  is  to  be  told  about 
the  other  small  countries,  whether  in  the  earlier  or  the  later 
part  of  the  period,  can  be  told  and  concluded  in  this 
place. 

It  was  rather  through  accident  than  otherwise  that 
Portugal  was  ever  important.  She  was  the  only  one  of 
the  small  states  in  the  peninsula  not  incorporated  into  the 

291 


The 

lesser  states 


Portugal  in 
the  past 


292  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

Spanish  monarchy,  but  while  she  retained  her  indepen- 
dence, she  was  too  small  to  become  powerful  and  great 
in  Europe.  Yet,  the  daring  of  her  sailors  and  the  advan- 
tages of  geographical  position  raised  her  for  a  short  while 
to  a  splendid  position.  In  the  fifteenth  century  her  sea- 
men slowly  explored  the  west  coast  of  Africa,  and  at  last 
got  to  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope.  In  1498  Vasco  Da  Gama 
reached  India,  and  afterward  the  Portuguese  built  up  a 
colonial  trade  and  a  colonial  empire  which  made  them 
important  and  wealthy.  But  the  grand  age  soon  passed. 
It  was  beyond  the  resources  of  the  nation  to  hold  such 
possessions.  In  1580  Portugal  was  conquered  by  Spain. 
During  the  period  of  subjection  the  Dutch,  who  were  at 
war  with  the  Spaniards,  took  away  the  Portuguese  pos- 
sessions in  India  and  especially  in  the  wealthy  Spice 
Islands,  thus  laying  the  foundations  of  their  own  prosper- 
ous colonial  empire.  Encouraged  by  France  Portugal 
became  independent  again  in  1640,  but  her  greatness  and 
her  power  were  gone.  In  1703  by  the  Methuen  Treaty, 
she  entered  into  intimate  commercial  relatiqns  with 
England,  and  after  that  time  she  became  more  and  more 
a  satellite  of  Britain.  In  1807  Napoleon  sent  an  army  to 
occupy  the  country.  British  troops  sent  to  the  rescue, 
however,  under  Sir  Arthur  Wellesley,  soon  drove  the 
invader  out.  The  British  continued  to  occupy  the  coun- 
try for  a  while  after  1814,  but  presently  they  withdrew, 
y  and  Portugal  like  the  other  countries  of  western  Europe 
was  the  scene  of  a  struggle  between  progress  and  reaction. 
^^^  No  great  advance  was  made  and  not  much  was  pos- 

century  sible,  for  the  country  had  no  large  national  wealth  and  no 

great  industries  or  trade.  Its  finances  were  hopelessly 
tangled,  taxes  were  very  high,  and  the  debt  of  the  na- 
tion was  large.  Brazil  had  piroclaimed  independence  in 
1822,  but  Portugal  still  possessed  a  colonial  empire,  mostly 
in  Africa,  much  beyond  her  resources  to  maintain.  Her 
debt  increased  and  her  affairs  became  more  embarrassed. 


14.    ETHNOGRAI 


^m. 


'W 


^  -9     'l^'^S 


S^^-^;m^""  ^;^ts^?i^^ 


pkholm 


MAP  OF  EUROPE 


THE    LESSER    PEOPLES 


293 


Therefore  it  was  not  possible  to  improve  education  or 
economic  conditions,  and  most  of  the  people  remained 
poor  and  illiterate,  with  small  understanding  of  political 
matters  and  no  experience  in  self-government.  So  the 
Portuguese  people,  in  their  out-of-the  way  corner  of 
Europe,  lived  on  in  the  quiet  decay  of  their  country,  in 
the  midst  of  monuments  of  old  grandeur,  attracting  little 
foreign  attention,  except  when  other  countries,  like  Ger- 
many or  England,  hoped  some  day  to  inherit  their  colonial 
possessions.  It  is  believed  that  in  1898  Great  Britain 
and  Germany  did  make  a  secret  agreement  about  how 
these  possessions  might  be  divided  between  them  later  on, 
if  Portugal  were  persuaded  to  sell. 

In  1910,  when  the  reigning  dynasty  had  sunk  into  com- 
plete disrepute,  the  young  king  was  driven  from  the  throne 
and  a  republic  proclaimed.  A  constitution  modelled  on 
that  of  France  was  adopted,  providing  for  a  legislature, 
Cortes,  with  a  ministry  responsible  to  it,  and  a  president. 
But  it  was  evident  from  the  start  that  it  would  take  gen- 
erations of  education  and  training  in  self-government 
before  the  Portuguese  people  could  make  it  work  success- 
fully, and  the  new  government  was  compelled  to  sustain 
itself  by  force.  Furthermore,  there  were  violent  disputes 
between  the  clericals  and  friends  of  the  republic,  for  not- 
withstanding that  the  entire  population  was  Roman 
Catholic,  the  republican  government  at  once  proceeded 
to  separate  Church  from  State,  suppress  the  wealthy  re- 
ligious orders,  and  confiscate  their  possessions. 

In  the  sixteenth  century  Spain  was  the  leading  power 
in  Europe  and  she  had  attained  such  greatness  that 
she  was  dangerous  to  all  of  her  neighbors.  Then,  for  a 
while,  she  was  mistress  of  the  entire  Iberian  peninsula; 
she  held  the  southern  part  of  Italy  and  controlled  the  rest; 
she  had  the  rich  provinces  of  the  Low  Countries,  and  had 
got  great  influence  throughout  German  lands;  and  she 
was  mistress  of  mighty  colonial  possessions.     Seldom  had 


The 

Portuguese 

Republic 


Greatness 
of  Spain 
in  the 
past 


294  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

any  empire  in  the  past  been  more  powerful  or  extensive. 
Her  soldiers  were  the  best  in  Europe;  she  was  a  strong 
naval  power;  she  drew  great  revenue  from  the  industrial 
districts  of  the  Netherlands;  from  Mexico  and  Peru 
she  received  the  greatest  quantity  of  gold  and  silver  that 
had  ever  come  to  any  people  in  the  world;  while  her  poets, 
her  dramatists,  and  her  generals  made  this  era  her  golden 
age. 
Decadence  Much  of  this  was  lost  in  the  seventeenth  century;  it 

of  Spain  was  mostly  gone  in  the  eighteenth;  and  in  the  nineteenth, 

Spain,  shorn  of  nearly  all  her  colonies,  had  sunk  far  below 
the  rank  of  the  first-rate  powers.  The  causes  of  this 
terrible  decline  have  often  been  explained,  but  they  still 
continue  to  be  instructive.  Spain,  like  Portugal  and 
Sweden,  undertook  far  more  than  her  strength  permitted. 
She  had  neither  population  nor  natural  resources  enough 
to  enable  her  to  hold  a  great  empire;  and  the  parts  of  her 
empire  in  Europe  were  so  scattered  that  it  would  have 
been  very  hard  to  hold  them  in  any  event.  She  exhausted 
her  resources  trying  to  win  back  the  revolted  Netherlands, 
and  in  1588  she  lost  a  great  fleet  in  the  waters  about 
England.  From  this  time  her  decline  is  often  dated,  but 
actually  it  resulted  from  far  greater  causes.  Much  of 
her  soil  is  not  rich  or  well  watered,  and  could  only  be  made 
to  yield  by  irrigation  and  intensive  agriculture.  The  best 
places  were  in  the  south,  where  agriculture  and  industry 
\  had  been  developed  by  the  Moors  and  the  Jews.  The 
Christians,  who  had  during  some  hundreds  of  years  slowly 
reconquered  the  country  from  the  Moors,  had  come  to  love 
fighting  for  its  own  sake,  and  now  they  scorned  any  labor. 
It  was,  indeed,  their  skill  and  aptitude  in  fighting  that 
enabled  them  to  make  their  conquests  in  Italy,  but  mean- 
while they  left  the  work  of  the  country  largely  to  the 
Moors  and  the  Jews.  Unfortunately  the  Spaniards  had 
become  the  most  bigoted  people  in  Europe.  Their  leaders 
determined  to  stamp  out  all  heresy,  and  soon  they  drove 


^•^:S'^^ 


THE    LESSER    PEOPLES 


295 


out  the  Jews  and  the  Moors,  thus  giving  a  death-blow 
to  the  basic  industries  of  the  country.  The  Inquisition 
made  such  war  upon  freedom  of  thought  that  all  the  bolder 
and  more  enterprising  intellects  were  suppressed  or  com- 
pelled to  conform.  There  was  indeed  no  heresy,  but 
there  was  also  no  more  of  activity  and  progress.  Mean- 
while Spain  constantly  lost  the  best  and  most  vigorous 
of  her  people,  who  went  out  as  emigrants  to  America. 
Vast  amounts  of  treasure  in  silver  and  gold  continued  to 
come  from  the  American  mines;  but  it  went  out  of  the 
country  almost  as  soon  as  it  entered,  for  there  was  little 
industry,  and  the  people  of  Spain,  no  longer  able  to  win 
wars  and  disdaining  to  work,  sank  further  and  further  into 
economic  stagnation,  using  their  money  to  buy,  at  high 
prices,  what  others,  who  worked,  could  provide. 

All  the  seventeenth  century  was  a  period  of  slow,  fatal 
decline.  At  the  end  of  that  time  the  old  dynasty  came 
to  an  end,  and  the  great  powers  quarrelled  about  how  the 
Spanish  Empire  should  be  partitioned  among  them. 
This  led  to  the  War  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  concluded 
by  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht  (1713).  By  this  treaty  the  out- 
lying dominions  of  Spain  in  Europe  went  to  Austria  and 
Holland;  and  Spain,  now  under  a  line  of  French  Bourbon 
kings  kept  only  her  colonial  dominions.  After  this  time 
there  were  some  fitful  attempts  at  revival,  but  they  all 
came  to  nothing,  and  for  another  hundred  years  she 
settled  down  further  and  further  into  torpor  and  decay. 

When  the  French  Revolution  came,  it  affected  the 
Spaniards  but  little.  But  the  French  under  Napoleon 
conquered  the  country  and  brought  the  reforms  which  they 
were  spreading  over  Europe.  It  was  in  this  moment 
that  the  Spanish  people  had  their  awakening.  They  re- 
mained, even  in  their  poverty  and  loss  of  power,  a 
people  of  high  and  strong  character.  Now  when  their 
position  seemed  hopeless  they  rose  fiercely,  and  fell  upon 
the  invader  to  save  their  country.     They  were  greatly 


Partition 
of  the 
Spanish 
Empire,  1713 


Revival  of 

national 

spirit 


296 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Reaction 
and  con- 
fusion 


The 

Spanish 

Republic 


assisted  by  the  topography  of  their  country  and  also  by  a 
British  army,  and  gradually  their  guerilla  fighting  wore 
the  invaders  out.  In  1812  the  liberals  among  the  revolu- 
tionists proclaimed  a  constitution,  patterned  after  the 
French  constitution  of  1791,  and  for  a  long  time  after- 
wards a  model  for  the  liberals  of  southern  Europe. 

Two  years  later  the  reactionary  king,  Ferdinand  VII, 
returned.  He  set  aside  the  constitution  and  abolished  the 
Cortes,  or  national  legislature.  He  was  able  to  do  this  be- 
cause the  constitution  was  hated  by  the  conservatives 
and  nobles  and  not  supported  by  the  peasants.  There 
was  now  a  period  of  reaction  as  in  France  and  other  Euro- 
pean countries,  but  in  1820  a  revolution  suddenly  broke 
out  and  Ferdinand  had  to  accept  the  constitution  again. 
This  was  contrary  to  the  wishes  of  the  Continental  powers 
in  the  Quadruple  Alliance,  and  in  1822,  at  the  Congress 
of  Verona,  they  resolved  that  France  should  intervene  to 
restore  the  absolute  rule  of  the  king.  The  reign  of  terror 
which  followed  was  long  afterward  described  in  a  terrible 
denunciation  by  Castelar,  the  greatest  orator  of  Spain. 
For  the  next  ten  years  the  king  ruled  with  power  un- 
checked. In  1833  his  daughter,  Isabel  II,  came  to  the 
throne.  Three  years  before,  at  the  time  of  her  birth,  the 
Salic  law,  which  forbade  the  succession  of  women,  had 
been  set  aside  so  that  she  might  succeed;  but  this  brought 
it  about  that  Don  Carlos,  the  king's  brother,  previously 
heir  presumptive,  was  debarred.  He  refused  to  give 
up  his  claim,  and  for  the  next  forty  years  the  coimtry  was 
plagued  by  uprisings  and  attempts  of  his  partisans,  the 
Carlists. 

During  the  long  reign  of  Isabella  the  Bourbon  reputa- 
tion sank  lower  and  lower,  until  in  1868  she  was  driven 
away  by  a  liberal  uprising,  and  a  provisional  government 
was  set  up  while  the  revolutionists  sought  a  new  monarch. 
It  was  during  this  search  for  a  sovereign  that  the  crown 
was  offered  to  a  relative  of  the  King  of  Prussia,  thus  cans- 


THE   LESSER    PEOPLES  297 

ing  the  tension  between  Prussia  and  France,  the  immedi- 
ate occasion  of  the  Franco-Prussian  War.  In  1871  Ama- 
deo  of  Savoy  accepted  the  throne,  but  after  two  years 
he  abandoned  his  attempt  to  rule  the  country.  Then  in 
1873  the  Hberals  set  up  a  republic,  but  Spain  now  fell  into 
the  greatest  confusion,  from  which  she  was  saved  only  by 
the  stern  rule  and  the  military  despotism  of  the  president, 
Emilio  Castelar.  Most  of  the  Spanish  people  cared  noth- 
ing for  a  republic,  and  in  1874  the  Bourbon  line  was  re- 
stored, when  the  son  of  Isabella  was  made  king. 

A  period  of  improvement  and  reform  now  began,  which  Slow 
slowly  produced  good  results.  In  1876  a  constitution  P'^g^^ss 
was  adopted  which  in  form  gave  the  people  a  government 
like  that  of  Italy  or  Belgium,  vested  in  a  parliament  or 
cortes,  elected  by  the  people.  In  1890  the  principle  of 
manhood  suffrage  was  adopted  for  electing  members  to 
the  lower  house  of  the  Cortes,  As  in  Great  Britain,  the 
ministry  is  dependent  upon  a  majority  in  the  Cortes  \  and 
as  in  France,  this  majority  is  formed  by  a  combination  of 
political  parties  willing  to  act  together.  Parliamentary 
majorities  were  made  by  the  ministry,  and  a  government 
could  always  control  the  elections.  The  extension  of  the 
suffrage  to  the  mass  of  the  people  strengthened  the  con- 
servative and  reactionary  elements  in  the  State,  especially 
the  Church,  since  many  of  the  voters,  who  were  illiterate 
as  well  as  inexperienced,  voted  entirely  at  the  dictation 
of  the  priests.  Nevertheless,  after  1880  a  period  of  reform 
began,  in  which  jury  trial  was  introduced,  taxation  re- 
formed, and  obstacles  removed  from  industry  and  trade, 
obstacles  which  had  survived  in  Spain  longer  than  almost 
anywhere  else  in  Europe.  The  liberal  leader,  Sagasta, 
wished  also  to  improve  education  and  take  it  out  of  the 
hands  of  the  clergy,  and  effect  such  a  separation  of  Church 
and  State  as  was  afterward  brought  about  in  France; 
but  notwithstanding  considerable  hostility  to  the  religious 
orders  because  of  their  wealth  and  possessions,  the  body 


298 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Recent 
conditions 


The 
Netherlands 


of  the  people  supported  the  clericals  and  enabled  them  to 
prevent  all  such  changes. 

The  decline  of  centuries  was  not  easily  to  be  made  up. 
The  country  was  poor,  agriculture  languished,  there  was 
little  industry  and  not  much  trade.  Most  of  the  people 
were  ignorant  and  superstitious,  and  more  than  half  of 
them  could  not  read  or  write.  Taxation  was  heavy  and 
the  national  debt  almost  too  great  to  be  borne.  None  the 
less,  gradually  there  has  been  an  improvement  in  the  last 
generation.  What  seemed  at  first  like  a  great  disaster, 
the  loss  of  the  remaining  Spanish  colonies  to  the  United 
States  in  1898,  soon  proved  to  be  a  blessing,  since  it  re- 
moved great  trouble  and  expense.  Of  late  the  population 
has  been  increasing  more  and  more  rapidly,  and  some 
wealth  and  prosperity  with  it.  The  land  has  been  getting 
more  and  more  into  the  hands  of  peasant  proprietors,  and 
manufacturing  and  commerce  have  once  more  begun  to 
flourish.  The  country  remains  poor,  and  in  the  midst  of 
their  splendid  cathedrals  and  lonely  palaces  the  people 
have  memories  of  the  past  more  than  possessions  in  the 
present.  Nevertheless,  there  may  still  be  a  prosperous 
future  before  them. 

In  the  sixteenth  century  the  Low  Countries,  which  for 
centuries  had  been  the  seat  of  the  most  thriving  industry 
and  the  richest  burghers  in  Europe,  were  provinces  of  the 
king  of  Spain.  During  the  Reformation  many  of  the 
people  became  Protestants.  Philip  II  of  Spain,  then  the 
leader  of  Catholicism  in  Europe,  tried  to  stamp  all  heresy 
out;  and,  partly  because  of  the  persecutions,  partly  be- 
cause of  oppressive  exactions,  the  people  rose  in  revolt. 
A  terrible  struggle  followed,  in  the  course  of  which  the 
western  provinces,  which  long  after  became  the  kingdom 
of  Belgium,  went  back  to  the  Spanish  allegiance;  but  the 
eastern  and  northern  provinces,  the  greatest  of  which  was 
Holland,  persisted  in  rebellion,  and,  aided  by  England,  at 
last  achieved  independence.     This  was  got  after  the  death 


THE    LESSER    PEOPLES 


299 


of  Philip  II,  though  not  formally  acknowledged  until  1648 
by  the  general  European  settlement  in  the  Treaty  of  West- 
phalia. 

From  this  struggle  the  Dutch  emerged  as  the  greatest 
sea  power  in  Europe.  They  had  obtained  a  splendid  col- 
onial empire  in  the  Far  East;  during  the  earlier  part  of  the 
seventeenth  century  they  did  a  great  part  of  the  carrying 
trade  of  Europe;  and  they  so  developed  the  herring  fish- 
eries of  the  North  Sea  that  the  waters  yielded  them  greater 
wealth  than  Spain  got  from  her  mines  in  Peru.  But  Eng- 
land now  began  to  rise  as  a  great  commercial  power,  and 
her  geographical  position  was  more  favorable  than  that 
of  the  Dutch,  since  she  lay  across  the  routes  of  the  Dutch 
to  the  outside  world,  and  could,  if  she  desired,  always 
close  them.  Sea  wars  followed,  resulting  largely  from 
commercial  and  colonial  competition,  in  which  the  Dutch 
failed  to  hold  their  own.  Worse  still  they  were  exposed  to 
attacks  from  France — then,  under  Louis  XIV,  the  greatest 
military  power  in  Europe — and  they  were  not,  like  England, 
protected  by  the  sea.  The  Dutch  did  save  themselves, 
and  afterward  together  with  England  they  checked  the 
aggressions  of  France;  but  by  1713  when  this  was  achieved, 
they  were  exhausted  by  a  task  which  had  been  far  beyond 
their  strength,  and  from  being  one  of  the  principal  Euro- 
pean powers,  in  the  eighteenth  century  they  sank  to  the 
second  class  and  no  longer  played  a  great  part.  The 
Dutch  still  possessed  a  large  colonial  dominion,  mostly  in 
the  Far  East;  and  they  continued  to  be  industrious  and 
successful  workers.  They  played  a  lesser  part  now  be- 
cause neighboring  powers  had  grown  far  greater  and  more 
rapidly  than  themselves,  so  that  relatively  they  were  much 
less  than  before. 

During  the  French  Revolution  Holland  was  overrun, 
and  in  1795  it  was  made  into  the  Batavian  Republic. 
In  1800  this  was  superseded  by  the  Kingdom  of  Holland 
under  Louis  Bonaparte,  Napoleon's  brother,  which  four 


The  United 
Provinces 


The  King- 
dom of  the 
Netherlands 


800 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Separation 
of  Belgium 
from  Hol- 
land 


Liberal 
progress 


years  later  was  annexed  directly  to  France.  But  when 
Napoleon's  power  was  falling,  and  when  the  Dutch  saw 
departing  the  French  soldiers  who  had  so  long  ruled  and 
plundered  their  country,  they  rose  and  proclaimed  a  king- 
dom under  William  I,  son  of  the  last  Stadholder  who  had 
ruled  before  the  Frenchmen  came.  The  Congress  of 
Vienna  determined  to  strengthen  Holland  against  possible 
aggression  from  France  in  the  future,  and  in  1815  what 
had,  before  the  French  Revolution,  been  the  Austrian 
Netherlands  was  joined  to  the  new  Dutch  kingdom,  now 
called  the  Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands. 

This  union  was  not  destined  to  last.  The  Dutch  were 
mostly  Protestant  and  Germanic,  while  the  population  of 
the  Belgic  provinces  was  Catholic  and  influenced  by 
France.  The  Belgian  population  was  more  numerous  than 
the  Dutch,  but  while  Belgium  was  compelled  to  contribute 
the  larger  part  of  the  taxation,  the  places  and  power 
in  the  government  were  reserved  for  Dutch  oflScials. 
William  I  outraged  the  feelings  of  his  Belgian  subjects  by 
trying  to  impose  on  them  the  Dutch  language  and  laws. 
In  1830,  after  the  revolution  in  Paris,  the  Belgians  rose 
against  their  masters,  and  demanded  a  separate  legisla- 
ture. William  refused  any  concessions,  so  they  pro- 
claimed their  complete  independence.  The  Dutch  people, 
inflamed  by  strong  national  feeling,  supported  their  mon- 
arch, and  he  would  have  easily  reconquered  the  rebels,  had 
it  not  been  that  England  and  France  intervened.  Thus 
Belgium  got  independence. 

Western  Europe  slowly  became  more  liberal  and  pro- 
gressive. William  himself  did  not  change,  but  becoming 
more  and  more  unpopular  he  abdicated  in  1840.  His  son 
shared  his  feelings,  but  was  wise  enough  to  yield  to  the 
tendencies  around  him.  In  1848,  when  the  revolutionary 
movements  were  overturning  so  much  in  Europe,  he 
quietly  granted  a  more  liberal  constitution,  which  with 
slight  changes  satisfied  his  people  thereafter.     The  minis- 


THE    LESSER    PEOPLES 


301 


try  now  became  responsible  to  the  States  General,  the 
Dutch  parliament,  though  the  representatives  in  the 
lower  chamber  were  still  elected  by  a  small  number  of 
voters.  In  1887  and  in  1896,  the  franchise  was  extended 
to  larger  number  of  voters,  but  as  late  as  1914  more  than  a 
third  of  the  men  were  not  yet  permitted  to  vote. 

The  political  history  of  the  country  was  now  unevent-  Political 
ful.  The  Dutch  were  intensely  conscious  of  their  na-  ^^^tory 
tionality,  and  passionately  resolved  to  keep  their  inde- 
pendence. They  had  no  great  love  for  England,  who  had 
once  beaten  them  in  great  trade  wars,  and  taken  some  of 
their  possessions;  but  France  had  been  the  great  enemy, 
and  they  had  only  been  saved  by  assistance  from  Britain. 
During  the  nineteenth  century  these  conditions  no 
longer  existed,  but  at  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth,  a 
new  danger  appeared.  Some  German  writers  asserted 
that  the  Dutch  were  closely  related  to  the  Germans,  and 
could  properly  be  citizens  of  a  Germanic  federal  union, 
and  that  Holland,  lying  across  the  mouths  of  Germany's 
great  river,  the  Rhine,  ought  to  be  brought  into  such  un- 
ion. More  and  more  did  the  Dutch  come  to  dread  incor- 
poration with  their  powerful  neighbor.  In  1890  Queen 
Wilhelmina,  a  girl  of  ten,  came  to  the  throne,  and  for  a 
while  her  subjects  feared  that  the  dynasty  might  die  out, 
and  their  country  lose  its  independence.  After  the  birth 
of  an  heir,  however,  this  fear  abated;  though  the  Dutch 
continued  to  guard  with  great  jealousy  against  any  in- 
fringement on  their  freedom,  and,  after  the  beginning  of 
the  Great  War,  they  guarded  their  neutrality  likewise. 

In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  the  Nether-  The  Dutch 
lands  lost  some  of  their  colonies  to  England,  and  as  a  re-  Colonies 
suit  of  the  Napoleonic  Wars,  Ceylon  and  South  Africa 
also,  but  they  still  continued  to  retain  one  of  the  wealthiest 
of  colonial  empires,  especially  in  the  Spice  Islands  off 
southeast  Asia.  This  empire  was  until  recently  admin- 
istered  with   less   consideration  for  the   welfare    of  the 


80«  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

natives   than   for   the    development    and    advancement 
of  commerce. 
The  The  history  of  the  Belgian  people  is  a  long  record  of 

Belgian  prosperity  and   misfortune.     In  the  Middle  Ages   they 

P®**P  *  had  the  most  thriving  industry  in  Europe,  and  the  splendid 

guildhalls  and  bell-towers  still  attest  the  magnificence 
of  that  era.  But  the  country  was  also  the  battleground 
in  many  wars  now  long  forgotten.  The  sovereigns  of 
France  strove  to  add  these  provinces  to  their  dominions, 
as  they  built  up  the  Kingdom  of  France;  but  they  got  only 
part  of  what  they  tried  for,  since  England  in  the  four- 
teenth century — as  in  the  sixteenth  and  the  seventeenth, 
the  nineteenth  and  the  twentieth — dreaded  to  see  the 
country  right  across  the  narrow  waters  from  her,  and  al- 
most at  the  mouth  of  the  Thames,  in  the  hands  of  some 
powerful  rival.  The  Belgian  provinces  joined  the  other 
Netherlands  in  the  revolt  against  Philip  II,  but  the  pop- 
ulation, being  almost  entirely  Roman  Catholic,  accepted 
the  overtures  of  Spain,  and  in  1579  abandoned  the  con- 
test. Under  the  languishing  rule  of  Spain,  and  after- 
ward under  the  ineffective  administration  of  Austria, 
these  provinces  suffered  decline.  By  the  Treaty  of 
Utrecht  the  port  of  Antwerp  was  closed,  so  that  its  com- 
merce was  ruined,  in  order  to  promote  the  interests  of 
Holland.  During  the  Revolutionary  period  the  Austrian 
Netherlands  were  easily  occupied  by  the  French  and 
presently  annexed  to  France.  In  1815  Austria  preferred 
resigning  her  Belgian  possessions,  since  they  were  too 
distant  to  be  easily  defended,  and  in  exchange  for  them 
she  took  territory  in  the  northern  part  of  Italy.  Belgium 
was  then  added  to  the  Dutch  Netherlands,  partly  to 
make  a  strong  state  on  the  French  frontier,  partly  to 
compensate  Holland  for  the  colonies  she  had  lost  to  Eng- 
land. In  1830  the  Belgian  people  rebelled,  and,  by  the 
assistance  of  Great  Britain  and  France,  got  their  inde- 
pendence.   In  1831  Belgium  was  established  as  a  state 


THE    LESSER    PEOPLES 


303 


independent  and  perpetually  neutral;  and  when  in  1839 
Holland  at  last  accepted  Belgian  independence,  the  provi- 
sion of  neutralization  was  again  confirmed  by  the  five 
great  powers,  Austria,  France,  Great  Britain,  Prussia,  and 
Russia.  Thus  Belgium  was  made  a  neutralized  state  as 
Switzerland  had  been  in  1815.  The  country  now  went 
forward  with  its  development  in  safety.  Shortly  before 
the  Franco-Prussian  War,  it  is  true.  Napoleon  HI  entered 
into  secret  negotiations  with  Prussia,  apparently  in  hope 
that  he  might  be  able  to  add  Belgium  to  France;  but  this 
came  to  nothing;  and  when  later,  in  1870,  Bismarck 
revealed  the  proposal,  the  British  government  made 
treaties  with  France  and  with  Prussia,  engaging  to  join 
forces  with  either  one  if  the  other  violated  Belgian 
neutrality. 

After  1831  the  little  country  went  forward  in  great 
industrial  development,  its  population  and  prosperity 
increasing.  Unlike  Holland,  which  remained  an  agricul- 
tural and  a  commercial  country,  Belgium  possessed  great 
resources  of  coal  and  iron,  and  became  one  of  the  greatest 
industrial  regions  of  Europe.  The  constitution,  adopted 
in  1831,  was  the  most  liberal  at  the  time  in  continental 
Europe.  As  in  Great  Britain  the  ministry  was  responsi- 
ble to  a  parliament.  As  elsewhere  then  the  franchise  was 
narrow,  being  allowed  only  to  those  who  paid  a  consid- 
erable tax.  In  1848  it  was  extended  a  little,  but  there- 
after for  nearly  half  a  century  no  change  was  made. 
Meanwhile  great  industrial  populations  had  been  assem-' 
bled  in  the  cities,  and  after  the  franchise  had  been  widely 
extended  in  all  the  neighboring  countries,  still  in  Belgium 
only  one  man  in  ten  could  vote.  At  last,  in  1893,  the  labor 
leaders  called  a  general  strike,  and  the  legislature,  soon 
yielding  J  provided  for  manhood  suffrage,  though  with 
double  votes  or  even  triple  votes  to  men  of  property  and 
at  the  head  of  a  family  or  with  unusual  educational  attain- 
ments or  experience  in  public  oflSce. 


Progress 
and  pros- 
perity 


S04 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Switzerland 


Sonderbund 
and  union 


The  Swiss  in  the  midst  of  their  mountains  got  their 
freedom  from  Austria  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  after  first 
defending  themselves  successfully,  presently  became  re- 
nowned as  the  best  mercenaries  in  Europe,  fighting  in 
most  of  the  great  wars  for  pay.  The  government  was  a 
federation  of  smaller  units,  or  cantons.  In  the  seven- 
teenth and  eighteenth  centuries  Switzerland  and  the 
United  Provinces  (.Holland)  were  the  only  two  important 
republics  in  the  world.  They  were  also  two  of  the  prin- 
cipal places  of  refuge  for  the  oppressed  and  those  who 
sought  religious  freedom.  During  the  French  Revolution 
Switzerland  was  first  penetrated  by  the  new  ideas  and 
then  overrun  by  French  soldiers,  and  in  1798  the  Helvetic 
Republic  was  established.  During  the  Napoleonic  period 
other  cantons  were  added,  and  still  more  were  joined  to 
the  Confederation  in  1815  when  the  Congress  of  Vienna 
re-established  it  and  guaranteed  its  neutrality.  The  can- 
tons remained,  as  before  the  French  Revolution,  united 
in  a  loose  confederacy,  each  with  complete  local  autonomy, 
much  as  were  the  American  commonwealths  before  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

In  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  cantons 
which  had  so  long  remained  in  partnership  began  to 
develop  a  division  which  after  a  while  threatened  to  dis- 
rupt the  Confederation.  Some  of  the  cantons  were  agri- 
cultural and  Catholic  and  under  clerical  influence;  others 
were  Protestant,  and  contained  large  cities,  and  in  1830 
they  liberalized  their  governments  and  tended  toward 
radical  ideas.  Thus  Switzerland,  like  the  United  States 
of  America  about  the  same  time,  was  split  into  two  parts, 
in  which  the  people  had  different  ideals  and  purposes,  and 
seemed  unwilling  to  continue  in  the  old  association. 
In  1843  the  Roman  Catholic  cantons  formed  a  Sonder- 
bund, or  separate  league,  to  protect  clerical  interests  wher- 
ever they  should  be  attacked.  In  1847  the  Federal  Diet 
of  the  Confederation  ordered  the  Sonderbund  to  dissolve. 


THE  LESSER  PEOPLES 


305 


Metternich  and  the  governments  which  he  influenced 
would  have  intervened,  but  the  separatist  movement 
was  soon  crushed,  and,  shortly  after  the  Revolution  of 
1848,  made  it  impossible  for  them  to  interfere.  The  tri- 
umphant party  now  remodelled  the  constitution,  and 
what  had  before  been  a  loose  confederation  became  a 
federal  republic.  By  this  constitution  of  1848  a  federal 
assembly  of  two  houses  was  established,  an  upper  house, 
the  Council  of  States,  consisting  of  two  delegates  from  each 
canton,  chosen  by  the  legislature  of  the  canton;  the 
lower  house,  the  National  Council,  consisting  of  repre- 
sentatives elected  by  voters  in  electoral  districts,  all  adult 
males  having  the  franchise.  The  executive  was  vested 
in  a  federal  council  of  seven  members  and  a  president, 
chosen  by  the  Federal  Assembly.  The  cantons,  like  the 
states  of  the  American  union,  had  their  own  constitutions 
and  governments. 

The  Swiss  people  continued,  as  for  a  long  time  before, 
to  show  that  it  was  possible  for  men  of  different  races  and 
religions  to  live  under  the  same  government,  each  having 
large  measure  of  freedom,  unmolested  by  the  others. 
Most  of  the  population  was  German,  but  considerable 
portions  were  French  and  Italian.  Some  were  Protestants 
and  some  were  Catholics.  There  was  no  attempt  to  en- 
force uniformity  of  language  or  customs,  as  in  Russia  and 
Austria-Hungary,  but  so  much  freedom  was  left  to  all 
that  the  Swiss  Confederation  was  reckoned  to  be  the  most 
successful  democracy  in  the  world.  And  while  its  people 
perfected  their  educational  system  until  their  schools 
were  as  good  as  any  in  Europe,  and  while  they  were  devel- 
oping great  industrial  prosperity,  they  continued  to  teach 
other  nations  the  art  of  self-government.  In  attempting 
to  work  out  devices  by  which  the  people  might  more  di- 
rectly control  their  government  they  perfected  the  rejer- 
endum  and  originated  the  initiative.  The  Referendum, 
or  referring    back    for    popular  vote  measures  already 


Progress  in 
self-govern- 
ment 


306  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

passed  by  the  legislature,  had  been  employed  by  some 
of  the  American  states  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  and  afterward  was  put  into  one  of  the  provi- 
sions of  the  French  Revolutionary  Constitution  of  the 
Year  I;  but  its  use  was  extended  by  the  Swiss  Constitu- 
tion of  1848  and  it  has  since  been  frequently  employed. 
The  Initiative,  by  which  legislation  or  an  amendment  is 
brought  forward  by  petition  of  a  certain  number  of  voters, 
was  invented  in  Switzerland,  then  established  in  their 
constitution  of  1848,  and  since  widely  extended. 
Scandinavia  The  Scandinavian  countries  were  usually  outside  the 

great  currents  of  European  history,  though  twice  they 
greatly  afiFected  neighboring  countries.  In  the  eighth, 
ninth,  and  tenth  centuries,  sailors  and  pirates  from  Nor- 
way and  Denmark  spread  terror  of  the  Northmen's  name 
all  over  Western  Europe,  and  some  of  them  established 
themselves  on  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea. 
The  Danes  ravaged  Ireland,  and  conquered  England  for  a 
while;  the  Northmen  sailed  to  Iceland,  Greenland,  and 
even  Vineland  or  America,  and  established  themselves 
in  northern  France  and  afterward  in  southern  Italy. 
Meanwhile  bands  of  Swedes  entered  Russia.  After  these 
great  Scandinavian  wanderings  came  to  an  end,  the  north- 
ern peoples  for  a  long  time  affected  the  rest  of  Europe  but 
little,  for  neither  their  population  nor  their  resources 
made  it  possible  for  them  to  take  a  great  part  among 
wealthy  and  powerful  peoples.  In  1397  the  three  coun- 
tries were  loosely  united  under  the  headship  of  Denmark, 
but  from  this  union  Sweden  broke  away  in  1523,  and  pres- 
ently rose  to  a  position  of  considerable  greatness.  The 
highest  point  of  her  eminence  came  during  the  seventeenth 
century.  When  central  Europe  was  torn  to  pieces  by  the 
Thirty  Years'  War,  Gustavus  Adolphus,  King  of  Sweden, 
saved  Protestantism  from  the  counter-reformation.  He 
also  established  the  greatness  of  his  country,  for  the  settle- 
ment made  in  1648  left  the  shores  of  the  Baltic  under 


THE    LESSER    PEOPLES  307 

Swedish  control.  But  during  the  eighteenth  century 
greater  neighbors,  like  Russia  and  Prussia,  rose  up  against 
her,  and  Sweden's  resources  were  wasted  in  vain  struggles 
to  keep  her  possessions.  In  1814  Denmark,  to  which 
Norway  was  still  joined,  was  an  unimportant  country,  and 
Sweden  had  lost  her  possessions  outside  the  Scandinavian 
peninsula. 

The  Congress  of  Vienna  took  Norway  from  Denmark  Sweden 
and  joined  it  to  Sweden.  The  Norwegian  people  de-  *^^  Norway 
clared  their  country  a  sovereign  state,  but  they  yielded  to 
the  great  powers,  and  the  two  countries  were  loosely  joined 
each  having  its  own  constitution,  but  united  under  one 
king.  This  arrangement  lasted  throughout  the  nineteenth 
century,  because  of  the  moderation  and  prudence  of  the 
rulers,  but  the  two  peoples  were  incompatible  and  diver- 
gent in  their  interests.  Sweden  was  larger  and  more 
populous;  she  was  also  richer,  but  wealth  and  power 
were  concentrated  in  the  hands  of  nobles  and  aristocracy, 
leaving  the  mass  of  the  people  without  property  or  political 
power.  The  government  was  vested  entirely  in  the  hands 
of  the  king,  checked,  when  at  all,  only  by  an  assembly  of 
estates,  something  like  those  which  had  disappeared  in 
England  and  Spain  long  before,  and  like  those  resurrected 
in  France  in  1789.  In  Norway,  while  the  resources  of 
the  country  were  small  and  the  soil  was  poor,  the  land  had 
become  divided  among  a  large  number  of  small  farmers; 
there  was  much  democratic  feeling;  and  the  constitution 
adopted  in  1814  put  the  government  in  the  hands  of  a 
Storthing  or  legislature,  in  which  the  representatives  were 
elected  by  voters  whose  franchise  depended  upon  a 
low  property  qualification.  In  the  nineteenth  century 
the  Industrial  Revolution  gradually  became  important 
in  Sweden,  and  then  manufacturing  was  added  to  her  agri- 
culture; in  Norway  commerce  was  developed  until  the 
Norwegian  merchant  marine  was  the  fourth  largest  in  the 
world.     In  foreign  relations  Norway  was  drawn  more  and 


808 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Separation 
of  Norway 
from 
Sweden 


Denmark 


more  toward  England  and  France,  while  Sweden,  resenting 
the  Russian  seizure  of  Finland,  and  always  fearing  further 
Russian  expansion  toward  the  sea,  more  and  more  imi- 
tated Germany's  methods  and  sympathized  with  her  pur- 
pose and  desires. 

So  the  two  peoples  drew  increasingly  apart.  In  1863 
a  Swedish  constitution  was  granted,  with  a  parliament  like 
those  of  western  Europe,  but  great  power  was  left  to  the 
king  and  also  to  the  wealthy  upper  classes.  Meanwhile 
Norway  became  increasingly  liberal  and  democratic.  In 
1884  manhood  suffrage  was  established.  In  1901*  she 
gave  the  municipal  franchise  to  women  tax-payers,  and 
six  years  later  followed  this  by  granting  the  parliamentary 
franchise  to  women  and  allowing  them  to  sit  in  the  Stor- 
thing. Moreover,  in  Norway  a  great  literary  national  re- 
vival was  carried  on,  so  that  the  people  became  more 
conscious  of  their  nationality  and  more  eager  for  complete 
independence.  For  a  long  time  tension  increased,  though 
there  was  never  a  resort  to  arms,  and  finally,  in  1905,  the 
Storthing  declared  the  independence  of  Norway.  The 
Swedes,  more  powerful  though  they  were,  wisely  decided 
not  to  try  to  force  their  neighbors  back  into  a  distasteful 
allegiance  of  no  use  to  themselves,  and  so  they  acceded 
to  the  separation.  A  Danish  prince  was  invited  to  be 
king,  but  the  monarchy  was  as  limited  and  as  democratic 
as  in  England.  In  1907  Great  Britain,  France,  Germany, 
and  Russia  signed  a  treaty  with  Norwegian  representatives 
guaranteeing  the  integrity  and  the  neutrality  of  Norway. 
Good  relations  with  Sweden  were  soon  resumed,  and  the 
two  countries  proceeded  on  their  separate  ways. 

Denmark  had  gradually  become  the  least  important  of 
the  northern  nations.  Norway  had  been  taken  from  her 
in  1814;  Schleswig-Holstein,  containing  some  Danish 
population,  had  been  lost  in  1864.  Across  the  base  of  the 
Jutland  peninsula,  which  had  previously  been  hers,  the 
great  German  Kiel  Canal  was  cut,  and  through  it  went 


THE    LESSER    PEOPLES  309 

ships  which  would  formerly  have  gone  around  through  the 
Danish  channels.  She  still  had  Iceland  and  Greenland, 
far  away  and  unimportant,  and  a  few  islands  in  the  West 
Indies,  which  she  finally  sold  to  the  United  States.  Fur- 
thermore, her  territory  seemed  to  some  of  the  ambitious 
German  leaders  to  be  properly  a  German  outpost  like 
Holland  or  Belgium;  and  increasingly  the  people  of  the 
country  lived  under  the  shadow  of  their  mighty  neighbor 
to  the  south.  Meanwhile  democracy  and  constitutional 
government  made  progress,  though  much  less  rapidly 
than  among  the  Norwegians.  In  1849  a  constitution 
was  granted,  establishing  a  Rigsdag  or  parliament,  but 
actually  government  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  king 
and  the  upper  class,  and  the  ministry  was  not  responsible 
to  representatives  of  the  people  any  more  than  it  was  in 
Russia.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 
money  was  frequently  collected  as  a  result  of  royal  decree, 
and  not  because  appropriation  was  made  by  the  Folkething 
or  lower  chamber.  But  the  people  developed  their  inten- 
sive agriculture  and  their  dairy  farming,  and  established 
a  remarkably  successful  system  of  cooperative  enterprise, 
by  which  middlemen  were  largely  eliminated,  and  so  far 
improved  their  economic  position  that  they  really  became 
more  and  more  important.  Accordingly  in  1901  the 
king  granted  what  he  knew  they  desired,  that  the  ministry 
should  be  dependent  upon  the  majority  elected  to  the 
Folkething  by  the  people. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Portugal:  Gustav  Diercks,  Das  Modeme  Portugal  (1918); 
Angel  Marvaud,  Le  Portugal  et  Ses  Colonies  (1912). 

Spain:  C.  E.  Chapman,  A  History  of  Spain  (1919),  based 
mostly  on  Don  Rafael  Altamira,  Historia  de  Espana  y  de  la 
Civilizacion  Espanola,  4  vols.  (1900-11),  the  best  general  work; 
for  the  more  recent  period:  Butler  Clarke,  Modern  Spain,  1815- 
1898    (1906);   Gustave   Hubbard,   Histoire   Contemporaine   de 


810  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

VEspagne,  6  vols.  (1869-83),  best  work  on  the  period  1814- 
1868;  Yves  Guyot,  L* Evolution  Politique  et  Sociale  de  VEspagne 
(1899);  Angel  Marvaud,  La  Question  Sociale  en  Espagne  (1910), 
VEspagne  au  XX"  Si^cle  (1913);  E.  H.  Strobel,  The  Spanish 
Revolution,  1868-1876  (1898);  David  Hannay,  Don  Emilio 
Castelar  (1896) ;  J.  W.  Root,  Spain  and  Its  Colonies  (1898). 

Holland:  P.  J.  Blok,  Geschiedenis  van  het  Nederlandsche  Volk 
4  vols.  (2d  ed.  1912-15)  trans,  by  Ruth  Putnam  and  others. 
History  of  the  People  of  the  Netherlands,  5  vols.  (1898-1912), 
the  work  of  a  great  scholar,  the  best;  H.  W.  van  Loon,  The 
Rise  of  the  Dutch  Kingdom,  1796-1813  (1915);  CHve  Day,  The 
Policy  and  Administration  of  the  Dutch  in  Java  (1904). 

Belgium:  R.  C.  K.  Ensor,  Belgium  (1915);  Leon  van  der 
Essen,  A  Short  History  of  Belgium  (1916). 

Switzerland:  W.  D.  McCrackan,  Rise  of  the  Svdss  Republic 
(2d  ed.,  1901);  Wilhelm  Oechsli,  Geschichte  der  Schweiz  im 
Neunzehnten  Jahrhundert,  vols.  I,  II  (1903-13),  covering  the 
period  1798-1830;  La  Suisse  au  Dixneuvieme  Steele,  a  coopera- 
tive work  edited  by  Paul  Seippel,  3  vols.  (1899-1901). 

The  Scandinavian  countries:  R.  N.  Bain,  Scandinavia,  a 
Political  History  of  Denmark,  Norway  and  Sweden,  from  1613  to 
1900  (1905);  C.  N.  Starke,  Le  Danemarck  (1900);  Sweden.  Its 
People  and  Industries,  published  by  order  of  the  Swedish  govern- 
ment, edited  by  Gustav  Sundbarg  (1904);  A.  A.  F.  Aall,  Die 
Norwegisch-Swedische  Union,  Ihr  Bestehen  und  Ihr  Losung 
(1912);  L.  Jordan,  La  Separation  de  la  Subde  et  de  la  Norvege 
(1906). 


I 


PART  II 
1871—1920 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

In  addition  to  the  works  mentioned  at  the  beginning  of  Part  I,  the 
following  may  be  consulted :  F.  M.  Anderson  and  A.  S.  Hershey,  Hand- 
hook  for  the  Diplomaiic  History  of  Europe,  Asiay  and  Africa,  1870-1914 
(1918),  a  cooperative  work  which  contains  excellent  summaries  and 
up-to-date  bibliographical  lists;  CM.  Andrews,  Contemporary  Europe, 
Ada,  and  Africa,  1871-1901  (1902);  A.  Debidour,  Histoire  Diplo- 
matique de  V Europe  depuis  le  Congres  de  Berlin  jusqu'd  Nos  Jours, 
2  vols.  (1916),  the  best  account  of  recent  French  diplomatic  history; 
W.  M.  Fullerton,  Problems  of  Power:  a  Study  of  International  Politics 
from  Sadowa  to  Kirk-Kilisse  (1913);  H.  A.  Gibbons,  The  New  Map  of 
Europe  (1914));  L.  H.  Holt  and  A.  W.  Chilton,  The  History  of  Europe 
from  1862  to  19 U  (1917);  J.  H.  Rose,  The  DevelojymerU  of  the  Euro- 
pean Nations,  1870-19U,  2  vols,  in  one  (5th  ed.  1916);  Charles  Sey- 
mour, The  Diplomatic  Background  of  the  War,  1870-19U  (1916). 

Nothwithstanding  that  a  great  part  of  the  most  important  diplomatic 
papers  remain  unpublished  and  inaccessible  in  the  various  archives 
of  Europe,  yet  a  large  number  have  been  published,  and  may  be  used 
in  such  storehouses  of  information  as  Archives  Diplomatiques,  129 
vols.  (1863-1914)  covering  the  period  1862  to  1913;  and  British  and 
Foreign  State  Papers,  108  vols.  (1841-1918)  covering  the  years  1812 
to  1914. 

For  information  about  governments:  W.  F.  Dodd,  Modem  Constitu- 
tions, 2  vols.  (1909);  F.  A.  Ogg,  The  Governments  of  Europe  (1913); 
Percy  Ashley,  Local  and  Central  Government:  a  Comparative  Study  of 
England,  France,  Prussia,  and  the  United  States  (1906);  Handhuch  des 
Offentlichen  Rechts  der  Gegenwart  in  Monographien  (ed.  by  Heinrich 
Marquardsen  and  others,  1883 — );  W.  B.  Munro,  The  Government  of 
European  Cities  (1909). 

For  current  information  the  following  annual  publications:  The 
Annual  Register  (1758 — );  L Annie  Politique  (1874-1905,  continued  as) 
La  Vie  Politique  dans  les  Deux  Mondes  (1906 — );  Europaischer  Ge- 
schichtskalender  (1861—);  The  Statesman's  Year  Book  (1864—);  The 
New  International  Year  Book  (1907 — ). 

The  student  with  a  taste  for  recent  history  will  find  a  fascinating 
field  for  exploration  in  the  volumes  of  the  more  imj>ortant  j>eriodicals, 
such  as.  The  (London)  Nation,  The  National  Review,  The  Quarterly 
Review,  The  (New  York)  Weekly  Review,  Revu£  des  Deux  Mondes,  and 
many  others.  He  will  also  find  much  instruction  and  amusement  in 
the  cartoons  of  such  publications  as  Die  Jugend  and  Punch.  * 

812 


CHAPTER  I 

THE   MILITARY   TRIUMPHS   OF 
GERMANY,    1864-1871 

The  old  political  science  was  mistaken  when  it  regarded  the  Army 
as  nothing  but  the  servant  of  diplomacy.  .  .  .  Such  a  con- 
ception .  .  .  has  vanished  from  our  age  of  universal  military 
service;  for  we  all  feel  nowadays.  .  .  that  the  very  constitu- 
tion of  the  State  reposes  upon  the  nation's  share  in  bearing  arms. 
Treitschke,  Politics  (trans.  1916),  ii  389 

The  military  becomes  the  true  type  of  human  society;  some  pitiless 
strategist  is  a  hero;  some  unscrupulous  conspirator  is  a  statesman; 
and  the  nation  which  is  the  best  drilled  and  the  best  armed  in 
Europe  is  to  go  to  the  van  of  modern  civilization.  .  .  this  we 
owe  to  Prussia. 

Frederic  Harrison  in  The  Fortnighily  Review,  December,  1870. 

Und  Trommeln  und  Pfeifen,  das  war  mein  Klang, 
Und  Trommeln  und  Pfeifen,  Soldatengesang, 
Ihr  Trommeln  und  Pfeifen,  mein  Leben  lang, 
Hoch  Kaiser  und  Heer! 

LiLiENCRON   (who  scFved  as  an  oflficer  in   1866   and 

1870-1) 

Shortly  after  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  The  German 
there  was  a  succession  of  wars  which  seemed  important  triumphs 
in  connection  with  the  unification  of  Germany  and  the 
founding  of  the  German  Empire;  but  seen  now,  in  longer 
perspective,  they  have  a  greater  importance,  because  they 
shifted  the  center  of  power  in  European  affairs,  and  be- 
cause the  conditions  which  decided  their  outcome  soon 
affected  the  life  of  every  great  people  in  the  world.  They 
were  the  Danish  War  (1864),  the  Austro-Prussian  War 
(1866),   and    the    Franco-German   War   (1870-1).    The 

SIS 


314 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


German 
military 
reputation 


The  armies 
of  an 
earlier  age 


first  is  relatively  unimportant  now,  but  the  second 
marked  a  new  era  in  the  history  of  modern  Europe,  and 
the  third  made  the  definite  ending  of  an  old  one.  Prus- 
sia was  seen  invincible  in  battle  and  of  matchless  military 
might. 

Afterward  the  reputation  of  German  military  power 
was  held  almost  as  the  legend  of  something  strange,  un- 
canny, superhuman.  But  actually,  after  it  had  risen  to 
the  height  of  its  power  and  then  been  broken  to  pieces,  it 
was  seen  to  have  been  the  carefully  wrought  work  of  men 
who  introduced  a  new  principle  into  military  usage  and 
then  perfected  their  work  with  wondrous  organization  and 
care. 

In  the  Middle  Ages,  when  the  "feudal  system"  flour- 
ished, armies  were  composed  largely  of  tenants  who  held 
land  partly  on  terms  of  service  in  war.  As  the  feudal 
system  decayed,  armies  came  to  be  composed  much  more 
of  mercenaries  or  paid  soldiers,  hired  by  the  ruler  of  a 
country,  or  assembled  by  some  captain  who  made  war 
a  business.  Such  mercenaries  served  in  the  Hundred 
Years'  War  between  England  and  France;  they  did  most 
of  the  fighting  in  the  wars  between  the  Italian  states;  and 
they  played  a  great  part  in  ruining  Germany  in  the  Thirty 
Years'  War.  As  great  national  governments  arose  these 
mercenary  soldiers  were  gathered  together  under  direct 
authority  of  the  central  government.  In  t^e  seventeenth 
century  Louis  XIV  of  France  had  a  numerous  army  of 
paid  soldiers;  the  German  princes  had  smaller  ones;  and  a 
very  small  force  was  maintained  in  England.  It  was  by 
building  up  the  largest  and  best  army  of  this  kind  in  central 
Europe  that  Prussia  laid  the  foundations  of  her  greatness. 
In  this  system,  which  continued  in  effect  until  the  period 
of  the  French  Revolution,  the  armies  were  small  in  num- 
bers, compared  with  the  total  number  of  people  in  the 
country;  the  soldiers  made  war  their  profession,  and  they 
were  paid  for  their  military  service. 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


315 


An  innovation  came  during  the  Revolution,  when  the 
republic  was  saved  by  great  new  armies  drawn  from  all 
of  the  nation.  "All  France  and  whatsoever  it  contains 
of  men  and  resources  is  put  under  requisition,"  said  the 
decree.  In  so  far  as  this  was  carried  out  it  substituted  the 
idea  of  the  men  of  the  nation  in  arms  for  the  older  idea  of 
a  small  force  of  hired  soldiers. 

It  was  the  Prussians  who  really  effected  this  revolution 
in  the  organization  of  war.  By  the  terms  of  the  treaty 
which  followed  Jena,  Napoleon,  desiring  permanently  to 
cripple  Prussia's  military  power,  limited  her  army  to 
42,000  men.  But  in  the  years  from  1807  to  1813,  while 
Stein  and  Hardenberg  were  freeing  the  serfs  and  abolish- 
ing class  distinctions,  the  army  was  reorganized  by 
Schamhorst  and  Gneisenau,  who  in  order  to  evade  Na- 
poleon's restriction,  kept  under  arms  the  42,000  men  only 
long  enough  to  give  them  the  proper  military  training, 
and  then  summoned  in  succession  other  forces  of  equal 
size.  The  result  of  this  was  that  when,  in  1813,  Prussia 
rose  against  the  French  Empire  in  the  War  of  Liberation, 
she  was  able  to  put  into  the  field  270,000  well-trained 
soldiers.  In  1814  the  principle  that  military  service  was 
the  obligation  of  the  citizen  and  that  the  army  should  be 
a  national  force,  was  embodied  in  the  Military  Law  of 
Boyen,  which,  proclaiming  that  "Every  citizen  is  bound 
to  defend  his  Ifatherland,"  provided  for  universal  military 
service.  Every  man  in  Prussia  was  liable,  on  becoming 
twenty  years  old.  He  was  to  serve  for  three  years  in  the 
standing  army  and  two  years  in  the  reserve;  then  for  four- 
teen years  afterward  he  might  be  called  to  serve  in  the 
Landwehr,  and  for  eleven  years  thereafter  in  the  Land- 
sturm.  That  is  to  say,  there  was  now  organized  in  Prussia 
an  army  of  the  men  of  the  nation,  part  of  whom  were  in 
active  service  and  ready  for  sudden  emergency,  while 
the  rest  might  be  mobilized  or  called  out  from  the  various 
reserves,  if  the  country  should  need  them. 


The  Na- 
tional army 
in  the 
French 
Revolution 


Developed 
by  Prussia 


Boyen*  s 
Law,  1814 


S16 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

Prussian 
army  in- 
creased 


Von  Moltke 
and  Von 
Roon 


For  a  long  time  the  importance  of  this  system  was  not 
realized  outside  of  Prussia.  Even  there  it  was  not  fully 
applied,  for  not  all  the  young  men  were  called  to  the  colors 
when  they  came  to  be  twenty  years  old,  and  as  numbers 
increased,  the  proportion  of  those  not  called  grew  steadily 
larger.  In  1860,  when  the  population  of  Prussia  was 
18,000,000,  with  150,000  young  men  reaching  military 
age  each  year,  she  called  into  service  only  40,000,  as 
had  been  arranged  in  1814  when  the  population  was  about 
11,000,000.  The  bitter  struggle  in  1862,  between  the 
king  and  the  Prussian  parliament,  had  to  do  with  en- 
larging the  army  by  calling  each  year  65,000  youths.  Bis- 
marck was  brought  into  the  ministry,  and  under  his 
guidance  the  desired  reforms  were  made:  the  standing  army 
was  now  increased  to  400,000,  with  double  that  number 
of  trained  reserves  in  the  Landwehr. 

In  1857  Von  Moltke  was  appointed  chief  of  staff  of  the 
Prussian  army  and  two  years  later  Von  Roon  became 
minister  of  war.  They  were  the  greatest  masters  of 
military  organization  and  preparation  since  Napoleon. 
During  the  nineteenth  century  European  railway  systems 
had  grown  up  and  communications  had  been  much  altered 
and  improved.  Von  Moltke  realized  clearly  the  im- 
portance and  the  military  meaning  of  these  changes  and 
began  training  the  commanders  of  the  Prussian  armies 
in  great  schemes  of  maneuver,  mobilization,  and  attack 
worked  out  in  advance.  Not  only  were  plans  elaborated 
in  minutest  detail  for  the  carrying  on  of  possible  wars  with 
other  great  powers  near  by,  but  under  Von  Roon  the  most 
careful  arrangements  for  rapid  mobilization  were  pre- 
pared, so  that  when  the  hour  came  each  man  might  quickly 
know  what  to  do.  Military  stores  and  equipment  were 
got  together,  a  splendid  artillery  was  provided,  and  the 
"needle-gun,"  a  breech-loading  rifle,  was  adopted  for 
infantry  use.  By  1864  Prussia  had  the  largest  and  best- 
equipped  army  in  the  world.     Much  of  this  was  little 


TRIUMPHS  OF  GERMANY 


317 


noticed  or  understood  at  the  time.  France  was  still 
regarded  as  the  greatest  power  on  the  Continent,  and 
most  people  considered  Austria  more  important  than 
Prussia.  But  a  series  of  wars  now  changed  all  opinion 
and  altered  the  history  of  Europe. 

The  first  contest,  the  Danish  War,  needs  little  atten- 
tion. South  of  Denmark  were  the  two  duchies  of  Schles- 
wig  and  Holstein,  peopled  largely  by  Germans,  but  joined 
with  Denmark  by  a  personal  union,  since  the  Danish  king 
was  also  Duke  of  Schleswig  and  of  Holstein.  Holstein  was 
a  member  of  the  Germanic  Confederation.  Many  people 
in  the  provinces  preferred  some  connection  with  their 
kinsmen  in  the  German  Confederation,  but  the  Danish 
kings  desired  to  attach  the  provinces  more  closely  to  their 
kingdom.  In  1852,  the  so-called  London  Protocol  provided 
that  while  the  King  of  Denmark  might  be  Duke  of  Schles- 
wig, the  duchy  should  not  be  made  part  of  Denmark.  In 
1863,  however,  the  Danish  government  attempted  to  do 
this  very  thing.  The  Germanic  Diet  protested,  and, 
indeed,  the  Germans  desired  that  Schleswig  be  admitted 
to  the  Confederation.  Bismarck  began  now  to  plan,  as 
he  afterward  declared,  to  annex  the  duchies  to  Prussia. 
He  contrived  to  bring  it  about  that  Austria,  whose  meas- 
ures he  had  just  been  opposing,  acted  with  Prussia,  and 
in  January  1864,  the  governments  sent  an  ultimatum 
demanding  that  within  forty-eight  hours  the  Danish 
government  repeal  the  constitution  which  decreed  that  the 
provinces  be  annexed.  This  demand  was  purposely  so 
contrived  that  it  could  not  be  accepted,  and  war  was 
begun.  The  armies  brought  against  Denmark  were  more 
than  sufficient  to  overwhelm  her.  The  Danes  attempted 
to  defend  themselves  behind  the  Dannevirke,  a  fortified 
line  of  defence  across  the  narrowest  part  of  Jutland,  but 
this  was  soon  forced,  and  the  entire  peninsula  overrun. 
The  Danes  soon  lost  command  of  the  sea,  and  the  in- 
vaders carried  the  war  into  the  islands,  which  are  such 


Schleswig- 
Holstein 


War  with 
Denmark, 
1864 


818 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

contest  with 
Austria 


The 

Austro- 
Prussian 
War,  1866 


an  important  a  part  of  the  kingdom.  In  August  the  contest 
was  abandoned;  in  October  the  Treaty  of  Vienna  sealed  the 
surrender  of  Denmark;  and  Schleswig  and  Holstein  were 
yielded  to  the  joint  possession  of  Austria  and  Prussia. 

Bismarck  was  about  to  bring  to  a  crisis  the  long  contest 
between  Austria  and  his  country  for  leadership  among  the 
German  peoples.  He  now  plotted  to  get  the  duchies  for 
Prussia,  and  rapidly  the  relations  between  Austria  and 
Prussia  were  strained  to  the  breaking-point.  Austria 
was  not  well  prepared  to  maintain  her  contentions,  so  she 
agreed  to  the  Convention  of  Gastein,  by  which  Prussia 
was  to  administer  Schleswig  and  she  would  administer 
Holstein.  Bismarck  regarded  this  merely  as  a  temporary 
measure,  and  busied  himself  so  that  when  the  conflict 
began  Austria  would  be  obliged  to  fight  single-handed. 
He  knew  that  Russia  was  friendly,  and  that  Great  Britain 
was  not  disposed  to  interfere  in  Continental  matters. 
With  France  he  carried  on  secret  negotiations,  which  have 
never  been  fully  revealed  but  which  may  have  seemed 
to  promise  Napoleon  territorial  gains  on  the  Rhine,  and 
so  he  made  it  probable  that  France  would  be  neutral.  With 
Italy  he  concluded  an  alliance  early  in  1866.  This  was  a 
dangerous  period  in  Bismarck's  career,  for  his  war  policy 
was  not  popular  in  Germany;  and  Austria  might  make 
terms  with  Italy,  or  else  France  might  intervene.  But  the 
hazard  passed,  as  the  crisis  moved  swiftly  forward.  Aus- 
tria mobilizing  her  forces,  demanded  that  the  disposition 
of  Schleswig  and  Holstein  be  referred  to  the  Diet  of  the 
Confederation.  Bismarck  declared  this  a  breach  of  the 
Convention  and  seized  Holstein.  Almost  all  the  German 
states  supported  Austria,  the  members  voting  in  the  Diet 
that  the  federal  forces  should  be  used  against  Prussia, 
and  the  Austro-Prussian  War  began  in  June,  1866. 

The  available  Prussian  army  numbered  660,000  men, 
well  trained.  The  infantry  was  armed  with  the  needle- 
gun,  which  could  be  fired  three  times  as  rapidly  as  any 


TRIUMPHS  OF  GERMANY 


319 


other  gun  then  in  use.  The  artillery  numbered  1,000 
guns.  Opposed  to  this  the  Austrians  could  bring  into  the 
field  600,000  men.  Their  army  was  based  not  on  universal 
service  like  the  Prussian,  but  on  the  conscript  system, 
in  which  men  could  hire  substitutes  if  they  wished.  Their 
infantry  was  armed  with  muzzle-loading  rifles,  inferior 
to  the  Prussian,  though  with  longer  range.  Their  artillery, 
800  guns,  also  had  longer  range.  Actually,  in  the  con- 
test that  followed,  the  Austrian  artillery  was  effectively 
handled,  but  the  campaign  was  decided  by  infantry 
fighting.  The  Prussians  had  to  use  part  of  their  forces 
against  the  smaller  German  states,  but  the  Austrians  were 
compelled  to  detach  part  of  their  army  to  act  against  the 
Italians  in  the  south. 

The  great  contest  was  fought  between  Austria  and 
Prussia.  The  Austrians  might  have  taken  the  offensive, 
but  they  resolved  to  await  the  attack.  What  followed 
astonished  the  world.  With  great  skill  the  Prussian 
armies  were  moved  through  the  mountain  passes  into 
Bohemia,  and  despite  all  the  efforts  which  the  enemy 
could  make  they  were  united  at  Koniggratz.  There, 
after  stubborn  resistance,  the  Austrians  were  totally  de- 
feated. A  few  days  more  and  Vienna  was  at  the  mercy  of 
the  invaders.  In  less  than  six  weeks  Prussia  had  over- 
come all  the  smaller  states  and  destroyed  Austria's  military 
power  completely.  Not  since  Napoleon's  time  had  such 
rapidity  of  movement  and  such  appalling  strength  been 
shown.  In  reality  Prussia  was  now  the  first  military 
power  in  the  world.  As  a  result  of  the  Treaty  of  Prague 
which  followed,  the  old  Confederation  was  dissolved. 
Prussia  became  the  head  of  a  new  confederation  of  the 
north  German  states,  she  annexed  Schleswig  and  Hol- 
stein,  and  various  other  territories  from  those  who  had 
opposed  her,  and  Venetia  was  acquired  by  Italy. 

Out  of  this  war  presently  emerged  the  causes  of  a  third 
great  struggle,  this  time  between  Germany  and  France. 


Koniggtatz 


Prussia 
and  France 


820  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

Such  a  war  ought  never  to  have  come  between  civilized 
peoples;  but  such  were  conditions  that  it  is  hard  to  see 
how  it  could  have  been  avoided.  Among  the  French  there 
was  growing  uneasiness  that  their  leadership  in  Europe 
was  being  taken  by  a  new,  upstart  state.  The  govern- 
ment of  Napoleon  III  had  passed  the  days  of  its  popularity, 
and  Bonapartist  leaders  believed  that  only  some  great 
success  in  foreign  policy  or  in  war  could  restore  it  in  the 
people's  estimation.  Napoleon  and  French  statesmen 
had  expected  Austria  to  win  in  1866,  and  had  probably 
never  intended  to  allow  her  to  be  so  badly  defeated  that 
the  political  balance  in  Europe  would  be  altered;  but  the 
struggle  ended  before  they  could  intervene  or  protest. 
They  were  bitterly  disappointed  that  France  was  not 
allowed  to  get  territorial  compensations,  when  Prussia 
had  just  made  such  gains;  for  not  only  did  France  get 
no  German  territory  along  the  Rhine,  but  when  Napoleon 
strove  to  acquire  Luxemburg,  Bismarck  opposed  it  and 
assisted  in  bringing  about  the  neutralization  of  that  coun- 
try in  1867.  The  position  of  France  in  Europe  had  dimin- 
ished through  mere  change  of  circumstances  elsewhere, 
and  the  French  people  felt  instinctively  that  something 
was  wrong.  Among  them,  therefore,  arose  the  idea  that 
there  must  be  "  Revenge  for  Sadowa ' '  (Koniggratz) .  It  is 
probably  true  that  the  great  majority  of  the  French  people 
had  no  desire  for  war  with  Prussia,  but  the  demand  for 
action  was  skilfully  cried  about  by  the  press  which  was 
controlled  and  cleverly  manipulated  by  those  who  pre- 
ferred to  have  war.  Actually  the  French  leaders  tried  to 
form  an  alliance  with  Austria  and  Italy,  and  some  arrange- 
ments were  made  for  cooperation  between  Austrian  and 
French  armies  against  Prussia,  to  take  place  in  1871. 
The  The  machinations  of  Bismarck  were  more  culpable  and 

plotting  of  far  more  cold-blooded.  Desiring  the  completer  union  of 
the  German  states,  he  believed  that  a  successful  war,  par- 
ticularly against  France  the  traditional  enemy,  would  serve 


Bismarck 


TRIUMPHS  OF  GERMANY         SU 

to  bring  them  together  in  a  burst  of  patriotic  ardor.  He 
afterward  said  he  had  not  believed  the  unification  of  Ger- 
many would  be  accomplished  so  long  as  France  could 
prevent  it,  and  that  it  would  be  necessary  first  to  over- 
throw her  in  battle.  He  felt  certain,  moreover,  that  Prus- 
sia would  win,  and  so  be  raised  higher  in  Europe  than  ever 
before.  So,  he  desired  war  with  France,  and  plotted  with 
all  his  craft  and  sldll  to  bring  it  about.  These  feelings  were 
not  yet  shared  by  most  of  the  German  people;  but  in 
Germany  also  the  press  was  so  controlled  and  manipulated 
as  to  hasten  on  the  contest  as  much  as  could  be. 

The  direct  cause  was  not  an  important  matter.  The  The 
throne  of  Spain  becoming  vacant  was  offered  to  a  member  ^^^ 
of  the  Hohenzollern  family.  France  fearing  Prussian  ^^^^  ^ 
influence  in  Spain,  when  it  was  elsewhere  growing  so 
rapidly,  dispatched  an  arrogant  note  demanding  Prince 
Leopold's  withdrawal.  Bismarck  believed  that  this  was 
the  opportunity  which  he  had  been  seeking  to  get  war  with 
France,  but  the  King  of  Prussia  caused  his  relative's  name 
to  be  withdrawn.  The  leaders  of  the  French  war  party 
now  gave  Bismarck  the  opportunity  he  sought.  The 
French  government  demanded  that  under  no  circum- 
stances should  Leopold  be  a  candidate  in  the  future.  The 
King  of  Prussia,  then  at  the  village  of  Ems,  rejected  this 
demand,  firmly  but  courteously  enough,  and  then  tele- 
graphed to  Bismarck  an  account  of  what  he  had  done, 
authorizing  him  to  publish  the  news.  Bismarck  deliber- 
ately, as  he  afterward  boasted,  condensed  the  king's 
words  so  cunningly  that  the  result  was  certain  to  seem  in- 
sulting to  the  French,  while  at  the  same  time  the  Prussian 
people  would  believe  that  their  sovereign  had  been  insulted 
by  the  insolence  of  the  ambassador  of  France.  The 
French  people  easily  fell  into  the  trap,  for  immediately  on 
publication  of  what  seemed  to  them  such  an  affront,  war 
was  declared.  And  so  well  had  the  thing  been  contrived 
that  the  war  was  very  popular  in  Germany.     All  the 


322 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  Franco- 
Prussian 
War,  1870-1 


France 
not  pre- 
pared 


North  German  Confederation  immediately  gave  support 
to  Prussia,  and  the  south  German  states  followed  after 
them  also.  It  was  war  between  France  and  a  Germany 
united. 

Seldom  has  any  country  ever  been  so  quickly  triumphant 
as  Prussia,  and  seldom  has  any  people  been  humbled  and 
overthrown  as  were  the  French.  In  after  days  nothing  so 
convinced  men  that  German  armies  were  unconquerable 
as  memory  of  their  victories  in  the  Franco-Prussian  War. 
Not  until  the  Battle  of  the  Marne,  forty-five  years  later, 
was  the  legend  of  German  invincibility  disturbed,  and 
not  till  the  very  end  of  the  Great  War  could  it  be  com- 
pletely destroyed.  Actually,  however,  it  is  evident  that 
the  German  military  organization,  with  its  system  of  uni- 
versal training,  had  been  developed  with  the  most  careful 
arrangement  for  the  contest,  while  France  went  into  the 
struggle  almost  unprepared. 

Although  a  new  law  had  just  been  passed  to  some  extent 
adopting  the  Prussian  system,  yet  the  French  army,  like 
the  Austrian,  was  still  based  on  the  old  principle  of  con- 
scription and  hiring  of  soldiers,  which  produced  a  standing 
army  without  the  great  mass  of  reserves  behind  it  which 
came  from  the  Prussian  method.  The  total  force  was 
supposed  to  be  about  600,000  men.  The  French  did,  in- 
deed, have  a  better  rifle  than  the  Germans;  and  they  were 
beginning  to  use  the  mitrailleuse,  an  early  type  of  the  ma- 
chine or  rapid-fire  gun,  but  this  weapon  was  not  yet 
generally  eflFective  nor  a  decisive  factor  in  war.  The 
entire  French  military  organization  at  this  time  was 
suffering  from  decay  and  poor  administration.  Plans  of 
mobilization  had  not  been  effectively  worked  out,  and 
supplies  and  munitions  were  lacking.  Actually  when  the 
war  began  France  was  able  to  move  down  to  the  frontier 
270,000  men  with  925  cannon;  and  during  the  first  phase 
of  the  war  not  many  more  were  ever  put  into  the  field. 
These  forces  were  moved  quickly,  in  the  hope  of  taking  the 


TRIUMPHS  OF  GERMANY         323 

offensive,  but  there  was  considerable  confusion,  in  which 
troops  were  moved  without  supplies  and  oflScers  could  not 
find  their  detachments.  A  slight  offensive  into  Germany 
was  begun,  but  in  face  of  the  ominous  movements  of  Ger- 
man troops,  it  was  at  once  abandoned,  and  the  French 
troops  prepared  to  try  to  repel  the  German  invaders. 

The  French  leaders  had  mistakenly  boasted  that  their  Prussia 
army  was  ready  "to  the  last  button,"  but  the  Prussians  '^^^y 
were  completely  ready.  Everything  apparently  had  been 
thought  out  beforehand,  and  every  emergency  provided 
for.  The  entire  plan  was  ready,  and  all  details  of  the  mo- 
bilization worked  out.  It  was  well  known  that  a  French 
advance  must  take  place  along  the  railroad  through  Alsace 
and  the  railroad  through  Lorraine.  With  extraordinary 
accuracy  the  German  staff  predicted  in  its  calculations 
just  how  far  the  French  could  be  by  a  certain  time.  Cal- 
culations about  their  own  movements  were  made  no  less 
truly.  While  the  French  were  beginning  to  discover  how 
little  ready  they  were  for  the  war  into  which  they  had  gone 
so  rashly,  the  German  troops  were  brought  down  to  the 
frontier  with  speed  and  precision  almost  never  seen  before. 
The  Germans  had,  all  told,  a  million  well-trained  troops. 
Of  this  number  they  moved  forward  nearly  500,000  with 
1,584  guns,  and  had  them  across  into  France  in  little  more 
than  two  weeks.  The  way  had  been  prepared  by  an  army 
of  spies,  who  did  all  they  could  to  confuse  the  French 
movements  and  collected  information  for  the  Germans. 

Outnumbered  two  to  one  in  men  and  in  cannons,  and  ^"^^ 
fighting  against  an  enemy  as  brave  and  resourceful  as  ^g  war 
themselves,  the  French  were  overwhelmed  from  the  start. 
They  were  in  two  armies,  one  under  the  Emperor  in  Lor- 
raine, the  other,  under  MacMahon  in  Alsace.  The  ad- 
vancing Germans  fell  upon  them  both,  to  keep  them  from 
uniting,  and  on  the  same  day  won  two  victories,  at  Worth 
in  Alsace  and  at  Spicheren  in  Lorraine.  The  French 
fought  bravely,  though  they  were  not  led  with  aggressive- 


8«4  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

ness  and  skill,  but  they  were  smothered  by  the  superior 
artillery,  and  crushed  by  the  masses  of  German  infantry. 
Their  northern  army  now  retreated  toward  the  fortress 
of  Metz,  while  the  southern  one  abandoned  Alsace,  the 
Germans  following  with  little  delay.  August  18,  the 
northern  army,  now  commanded  by  Bazaine,  was  de- 
feated in  the  battle  of  Gravelotte-St.  Privat,  and  took 
refuge  within  the  fortifications  of  Metz.  A  smaller  army 
was  left  to  surround  it,  while  all  the  rest  of  the  German 
forces  hastened  after  the  other  French  command.  By  a 
series  of  magnificent  strategic  moves  Moltke  presently 
drove  MacMahon  into  the  town  of  Sedan  on  the  Meuse, 
where  he  was  pushed  back  until  his  huddled  troops  were 
commanded  by  the  German  artillery,  placed  on  the  sur- 
rounding hills.  Vainly  the  French  strove  to  break  through 
the  ring  so  swiftly  put  about  them.  September  1st,  their 
entire  army  surrendered,  and  the  emperor  was  among  the 
captives. 

France  was  now  completely  defeated,  and,  had  the  con- 
second  ditions  of  modern  warfare  been  more  clearly  understood 
phase  then,  the  French  people  might  have  abandoned  the  strug- 
gle. One  of  their  armies  had  just  surrendered.  The  other 
was  surrounded;  and  the  event  was  to  prove  that  Bazaine's 
army  could  not  escape.  The  German  armament  and 
equipment  were  so  powerful  that,  as  in  the  Great  War, 
it  was  found  almost  impossible  to  break  their  lines  when 
they  occupied  entrenched  positions.  Accordingly,  the 
'  regular  army  of  France  was  now  lost,  and  she  had  no 
trained  reserves  like  the  Germans,  because  she  had  had 
nothing  like  the  Prussian  system  of  universal  military 
training.  None  the  less  she  had  not  lost  her  courage.  In 
1918,  when  the  German  armies  were  tottering,  but  not  yet 
completely  beaten,  Germany  did  not  prolong  the  struggle, 
but  drew  back  her  soldiers  and  surrendered  her  ships  with- 
out any  further  attempt.  In  1870  it  was  not  so  with  the 
French.     The  government  of  Napoleon  was  overturned. 


The 


\ 


I 


15. 


^t.Petersbursr 


^     cfStockhrfiiii 


<(5^  i 

■Jeriia  \ 


^^\  R  U    S    S    I    A   N 


'EMPIRE 

■^  Warsaw 


e  ^  o  Cracow 


\ 


nna 

TKIAM        EMPIRE 


^^       -^— .-^  ^  -"^    WALLA.CHIA 

PfeC      """"^^  Belgrade 

^^N    TURKISH 
IRE 


£:^:i::ib 


GENERAL  DRAFTING  CO.INC.M.Y. 


IN  1871 


I     k'Jii?. 


TRIUMPHS  OF  GERMANY         325 

a  republic  established,  and  the  new  government  sought 
peace;  but  it  refused  to  cede  a  stone  of  the  fortresses  or  an 
inch  of  the  soil  of  France.  Bismarck  was  resolved  to  have 
conquests  in  France,  and  so  the  struggle  continued.  The 
German  armies  closed  in  upon  Paris,  while  detachments 
spread  conquest  wide  over  the  country. 

The  effort  made  by  the  French  people  was  amazing.  The  rising 
They  called  out  the  manhood  of  the  nation,  and  raised  °^  *^® 
armies  of  1,800,000  men.  But  they  were  armies  only  in  people 
name.  The  men  had  had  no  military  training.  It  was 
impossible  to  get  enough  capable  officers  and  commanders, 
and  most  of  the  military  stores  and  equipment  had  been 
lost.  In  vain  did  they  try  to  purchase  supplies  and 
munitions  abroad;  they  got  inferior  goods  at  outrageous 
prices,  and  there  was  not  sufficient  time  to  get  enough  of 
anything,  even  so.  Such  was  their  energy  that  they  did 
put  large  forces  in  the  field;  but  during  the  awful  winter 
of  1870-1,  while  France  suffered  fearfully  and  her  soldiers 
endured  terrible  losses,  the  new  armies  never  gained  against 
the  inferior  numbers  of  the  German  troops  a  single  sub- 
stantial victory.  It  was  not  even  necessary  for  the  Ger- 
mans to  draw  to  any  extent  on  their  reserves  across  the 
Rhine.  They  held  the  fortresses,  Belfort,  Strassburg, 
Metz,  and  the  fortified  camp  of  Paris  in  grip  of  iron;  and 
directed  their  principal  effort  to  the  taking  of  Paris.  For 
four  months  that  great  city  held  out  through  a  dreadful 
siege,  and  finally  a  heavy  bombardment.  Provisions  gave 
out  and  there  was  appalling  suffering  from  the  cold  of 
winter  and  increasing  famine.  The  old  people  and  the 
young  children  died,  as  is  ever  the  case.  One  by  one,  save 
for  Belfort,  the  other  fortresses  surrendered.  In  Paris  a 
great  citizen  army  was  raised,  but  it  was  ill-trained  and 
insubordinate,  and  not  able  to  break  the  lines  of  the  be- 
siegers. Gradually  all  hope  of  deliverance  from  outside 
was  abandoned.  The  Germans  everywhere  defeated  and 
scattered  the  raw  levies  raised  against  them,  and  occupied 


326 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  lesson 
of  their 
riting 


The  Treaty 
of  Frankfort 


more  and  more  of  the  country.  They  acted  with  much 
harshness  and  severity,  attempting  to  discourage  the  for- 
mation of  the  new  armies,  shooting  down  as  franc-tireurs 
those  who  tried  to  defend  their  country  without  uniform 
or  part  in  regular  military  organization,  taking  hostages, 
imposing  fines  and  ransoms,  and  burning  some  places  in 
reprisal;  not  so  hardly  and  so  terribly  as  when  they  re- 
entered France  in  1914,  but  in  manner  that  was  ominous 
of  the  future. 

The  Germans  had  won  the  victory  in  the  first  two 
months.  The  heroic  efforts  of  the  French  people  prolonged 
the  agony  for  four  months  longer.  Nothing  in  those  four 
months  altered  the  outcome,  and  they  merely  imposed 
additional  suffering  on  the  nation.  And  yet,  this  heroism 
was  not,  perhaps,  useless.  It  gave  stern  warning  that  these 
people  held  high  their  honor,  and  would  not  yield  until 
the  uttermost  was  endured.  The  events  of  1918  showed 
that  the  Germans  might  yield  when  they  were  badly  de- 
feated; but  what  happened  in  France  in  the  cold,  horrible 
first  months  of  1871,  showed  that  France  did  not  surrender 
until  her  strength  was  annihilated  and  her  people  com- 
pletely prostrate. 

January  28,  1871  Paris  surrendered,  and  the  war  was 
brought  to  an  -eim.  l  The  triumph  of  the  Germans  was 
complete.  By  the  Treaty  of  Frankfort  (1871),  France 
ceded  Alsace  and  most  of  Lorraine,  agreed  to  pay  an  in- 
demnity of  $1,000,000,000,  and  granted  favorable  commer- 
cial terms  to  her  foe.  The  result  was  that  France  lost  for 
the  next  two  generations  the  primacy  in  Europe  she  had 
so  long  enjoyed;  that  her  frontier  was  now  weaker  and 
Paris  the  capital  left  much  more  exposed  than  before;  that 
she  was  to  crouch  in  fear  before  an  all-powerful  and  arro- 
gant Germany  for  the  next  forty  years;  that  German 
manufactures,  because  of  the  favorable  terms  which  were 
granted,  were  to  make  it  impossible  for  France  to  enter 
upon  great  commercial  development;  that  Germany  would 


Mainz 


GENERAL  DRAFTING  CO.INC.N.r, 


16.    ALSACE-LORRAINE 


327 


328  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

thereafter  feel  invincible  and  superior  and  so  behave;  and 
that  since  the  entire  cost  of  the  war,  at  the  utmost,  had 
been  to  her  not  so  much  as  $500,000,000,  she,  receiving 
double  that  sum,  would  believe  in  the  future  that  all  her 
wars  would  bring  conquests,  and  that  the  defeated  enemy 
would  always  pay  and  reward  her  with  booty. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  Austro-Prussian  War:  H.  M.  Hozier,  The  Seven  Weeks* 
fTar,  2  vols.  (1867). 

The  Franco-Prussian  War,  origin;  Hans  Delbriick,  Der 
Ur sprung  des  Krieges  von  1870  (1893);  Edmond  Palat  [Pierre 
Lehautcourt],  Les  Origines  de  la  Guerre  de  1870  (1912). 

The  Wslt:  Der  Deutsch-Franzosische  Krieg,  1870-71  (ed.  by  the 
Historical  Section  of  the  Great  General  Staff),  5  cols,  and  2  vols, 
of  maps  (1874-81);  Arthur  Chuquet,  La  Guerre  de  1870-1871 
(1895);  Hellmuth  von  Moltke,  Geschichte  des  Deutsch-Franzo- 
sischen  Krieges  von  1870-71  (1891),  trans,  by  Clara  Bell  and  H. 
W.  Fischer,  2  vols.  (1891) ;  E.  Palat,  Histmre  de  la  Guerre  de  1870, 
7  vols.  (1901-8),  to  the  surrender  of  Metz,  Guerre  de  1870-1871, 
2  vols.  (1910);  Krieg  und  Sieg,  1870-71,  ed.  by  J.  A.  von  Pflugk- 
Harttung  (1895),  trans,  ed.  by  Major-General  Sir  F.  Maurice 
(1914);  A.  Sorel,  Histoire  Diplomatique  de  la  Guerre  Franco- 
Allemande,  2  vols.  (1875),  based  on  accounts  of  participants. 

Special  studies  on  the  military  operations:  Fritz  Honig,  Der 
Volkskrieg  an  der  Loire  im  Herbst  1870,  8  vols.  (1893-7);  George 
Hooper,  The  Campaign  of  Sedan  (1914). 

The  Treaty  of  Frankfort:  Jules  Favre,  Le  Gouvernement  de  la 
DSfense  Nationale,  1871-1872,  3  vols.  (1871-5);  G.  May,  Le 
Traits  de  Francfort  (1909),  best,  based  on  studies  in  the  archives. 

Contemporary  accounts:  Dr.  Moritz  Busch,  Bismarck  in  the 
Franco-German  War,  1870-1871,  authorized  trans.,  2  vols. 
(1879);  Eduard  Engel,  Kaiser  Friedrich's  Tagebuch  (1919);  Lord 
Augustus  Loftus,  Diplomatic  Reminiscences,  1862-1879,  2  vols. 
(1894);  Lord  Newton,  Lord  Lyons,  a  Record  of  British  Diplo- 
macy, 2  vols.  (1913),  the  British  ambassador  to  France  during 
the  period  of  the  Franco-Prussian  War;  E.  B.  Washburne, 
Recollections  of  a  Minister  to  France,  1869-1877,  2  vols  (1883), 
the  American  minister. 


CHAPTER 

THE    GROWTH    OF 

GERMAN    EMPIRE 


II 

THE    NEW 


Die  deutsche  Nation  ist  trotz  ihrer  alten  Geschichte  das  jimgste 
unter  den  grossen  Volkern  Westeuropas. 

Heinrich  von  Treitschke,  Deutsche  Geschichte  im  Neunzehnten 
Jahrhundert  (1879),  i.  1. 

Seldom,  if  ever,  has  a  country  experienced  such  a  tremendous  econ- 
omic development  in  such  a  short  time  as  the  German  Empire.  .  .  . 
Prince  Bernhard  von  Bui^ow,  Imperial  Germany  (translated 
by  M.  A.  Lewenz,  1914),  pp.  248,  249. 

To  THE  people  of  the  new  German  Empire  the  period 
following  their  military  triumphs  brought  unparalleled 
prosperity  and  power.  The  years  from  1871  to  1914  were 
like  a  mighty  epic,  or  a  paean  of  triumph,  grander  and 
more  splendid  in  time's  progress.  Such  increase  had 
probably  never  been  seen  anywhere  else  before.  In  mod- 
ern times  it  was  rivalled  only  by  the  rise  of  Japan,  and  the 
growth  of  the  United  States.  Sometimes  there  comes  in 
a  people's  life  vast  quickening  of  spirit  and  hope,  when  it 
seems  that  youth  will  never  depart,  and  boundless 
confidence  and  boundless  ambition  accompany  limitless 
strength.  Such  a  time  had  come  to  Italians  in  the  days 
of  the  Renaissance;  Englishmen  had  it  under  Elizabeth  and 
Pitt;  Frenchmen  in  the  French  Revolution.  It  came  to 
Germans  after  1870.  In  industry,  in  commerce,  in  popu- 
lation, in  wealth,  and  in  power  they  went  forward  with 
amazing  strides,  until  they  believed  that  before  them  lay 
the  destiny  of  men  who  would  rule  all  of  the  world. 

329 


Greatness  of 
the  German 
Empire 


330 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Causes  of 
success 


The  govern- 
ment of  the 
Empire 


Ministerial 
government 


The 

German 

system 


The 
Roichatai 


This  success  came  from  many  causes:  from  the  union 
at  last  achieved ;  from  the  splendid  qualities  of  the  people 
themselves;  from  the  excellence  of  their  educational  sys- 
tem; from  altered  conditions  respecting  industry  and  trade 
which  were  working  now  in  their  favor;  and  from  the  Ger- 
man genius  for  organization,  applied  now  to  winning 
triumphs  in  peace  as  it  had  been  used  to  get  victory  in 
war.  The  system  of  government  established  was  very  in- 
teresting. Apparently  control  was  vested  in  representa- 
tives of  the  people,  but  in  reality  the  constitution  was 
carefully  devised  to  retain  actual  power  for  the  upper 
class  supporting  an  autocratic  ruler  at  the  top. 

Like  most  nineteenth-century  constitutions  in  Europe, 
it  followed  the- form  of  the  English  system  of  ministry  and 
elected  legislature.  Generally  speaking,  wherever  the 
cabinet  system  prevails  in  any  form,  the  test  of  the  govern- 
ment being  controlled  by  the  people  is  that  the  executive 
shall  depend  upon  the  support  of  the  majority  of  represen- 
tatives elected  by  the  voters,  and  that  these  representa- 
tives shall  really  make  the  laws,  grant  the  taxes,  and 
control  the  spending  of  public  money. 

In  respect  of  these  things  it  is  interesting  to  study  the 
government  of  the  German  Empire  established  in  1871, 
which  was  substantially  the  government  of  the  preced- 
ing North  German  Confederation  made  in  1867.  The 
Deutsckes  Reich  was  a  federation  consisting  of  twenty-five 
states  and  the  Reichsland,  Alsace-Lorraine.  It  was  ruled 
by  the  Kaiser  (emperor),  who  was  the  King  of  Prussia,  the 
Bundesrai  (council  of  the  federation),  and  the  Reichstag 
(representative  assembly  of  the  Empire).  The  only  part 
of  this  system  which  was  directly  or  indirectly  controlled 
by  the  people  was  the  Reichstag-,  and  the  effect  of  the  con- 
stitution was  to  concentrate  a  great  part  of  all  the  power 
in  the  hands  of  the  Kaiser. 

The  Reichstag  was  elected  by  the  voters,  men  of  twenty- 
five  years  or  older.    Its  functions  were  to  assist  in  making 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


331 


the  laws  and  to  pass  appropriations  of  money.  But  it  was 
defective  in  its  representation  and  it  had  not  very  much 
real  power.  There  was  no  reapportionment  of  representa- 
tion as  population  shifted  from  one  district  to  another, 
notably  from  country  to  the  cities,  so  that  after  a  while 
there  were  as  scandalous  inequalities  in  representation  as 
had  prevailed  in  England  before  electoral  reform.  More- 
over, appropriations  of  money  were  often  made  by  the 
Reichstag  for  periods  of  years,  so  that  it  lost  much  of  the 
power  which  comes  from  steady  control  of  the  purse;  and 
no  important  piece  of  legislation  could  be  passed  without 
the  Bundesrafs  consent. 

The  Bundesrat  was  not,  properly  speaking,  an  upper 
house  of  the  legislature.  It  was  composed  of  members 
sent  by  the  various  states  of  the  Federation,  representing 
not  the  people  but  the  rulers  and  governments  of  these 
states,  bound  to  vote  in  accordance  with  instructions  given 
by  these  governments,  and  acting  really  as  ambassadors 
of  the  princes  who  sent  them.  No  law  could  be  passed 
without  the  assent  of  the  Bundesrat^  and  as  laws  usually 
originated  there,  legislative  power  was  in  the  Bundesrat, 
not  in  the  Reichstag.  But  as  Prussia  could  always  control 
enough  votes  in  the  Bundesrat  to  prevent  the  passage  of  a 
measure,  government  was  really  in  the  keeping  of  Prussia, 
which  had,  indeed,  three  fifths  of  the  population  and  two 
thirds  of  the  territory  of  the  empire. 

Prussia  had  the  most  backward  government  in  the  em- 
pire. The  legislative  power  was  vested  in  the  Landtag 
(assembly)  of  two  chambers  or  houses.  The  upper  con- 
sisted of  princes  and  others  appointed  by  the  king  as  hered- 
itary members  or  for  life.  The  lower  contained  members 
elected  by  the  voters  under  the  famous  system  of  three- 
class  voting.  "The  primary  voters,"  said  the  Prussian 
Constitution  of  1850,  "shall  be  divided  into  three  classes  in 
proportion  to  the  amount  of  direct  taxes  they  pay,  and  in 
such  a  manner  as  that  each  class  shall  represent  a  third  of 


The 
Bundesrat 


The 

government  ■ 
of  Prussia. 


332 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Junkers  and 
Kaiaer 


WiUiaml 
1871-1888 


the  sum  total  of  the  taxes  paid  by  the  primary  voters." 
The  result  of  this  was  that  two  thirds  of  the  representation 
and  the  control  of  the  lower  house  were  given  to  one  sixth 
of  the  voters,  who  composed  the  upper  and  wealthiest 
class.  In  Berlin  it  came  to  be  that  a  rich  man's  vote  was 
worth  the  votes  of  fifty  poor  ones.  Moreover,  the  king  of 
Prussia  had  an  absolute  veto  upon  legislation,  and,  in  prac- 
tice, initiated  such  laws  as  were  passed.  That  is  to  say, 
the  government  of  Prussia,  which  in  effect  controlled  the 
government  of  the  empire,  was  in  the  hands  of  the  king  of 
Prussia  and  the  upper  class.  This  class  was  made  up  of  the 
industrial  magnates  and  especially  of  the  nobles  and  great 
landowners,  the  Junkers. 

The  Junkers  were  among  the  most  aristocratic  and  con- 
servative people  in  Europe.  They  constituted  an  upper 
class  apart  from  the  people,  having  the  social  superiority 
of  the  aristocracy  in  England,  but  much  more  influence 
and  power.  If  they  could  retain  their  privileges,  they 
would  support  the  king  without  flinching.  Accordingly, 
in  last  resort  the  real  power  in  the  government  of  Prussia 
was  in  the  hands  of  the  king,  and  the  real  government  of 
the  empire  was  also  in  his  hands  as  emperor.  The  Prus- 
sian Constitution  implied  the  doctrine  of  divine  right, 
which  the  emperor  often  asserted.  "Looking  upon  my- 
self as  the  instrument  of  the  Lord,*'  he  said  in  1910,  "with- 
out regard  to  contemporary  opinions  and  intentions,  I 
go  my  way."  He  possessed  the  executive  power,  he  ap- 
pointed the  important  oflScials,  he  controlled  in  effect  the 
Bundesrat,  and  his  ministers  were  not  responsible  to  the 
Reichstag,  In  1913  the  chancellor  told  the  members  of 
the  Reichstag  explicitly  that  he  was  responsible  to  the 
emperor,  not  to  them. 

In  1871,  William  I,  already  for  ten  years  King  of  Prussia, 
became  first  emperor  of  the  new  state.  He  was  an  elderly 
man  when  he  came  to  Prussia's  throne,  already  conserva- 
tive with  age,  but  always  he  had  been  slow,  steady,  and 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


333 


strong,  honorable  and  just  as  he  saw  the  right.  He  had 
served  against  Napoleon  in  the  War  of  Liberation,  and  all 
through  his  life  he  was  fond  of  his  army  and  delighted  in 
military  things.  He  was  filled  with  the  old  Prussian  idea 
of  the  high  position  of  kings,  and  believed  thoroughly  in 
divine  right  of  monarchs.  "The  kings  of  Prussia  receive 
their  crowns  from  God,"  he  said.  The  gigantic  success  of 
Germany  during  his  years  threw  a  halo  about  his  person 
and  added  to  the  prestige  of  the  crown.  Actually  during 
his  reign  the  destinies  of  the  empire  were  guided  by  his 
trusted  servant,  Bismarck,  whose  ideas  about  government 
were  always  much  like  his  own. 

During  the  long,  splendid  reign  of  William  I,  then,  there 
could  be  little  tendency  toward  a  parliamentary  system  of 
government  or  greater  control  by  the  people.  It  seemed 
that  this  might  come  about  in  the  time  of  his  son,  Fred- 
erick III,  who  disliked  Bismarck,  and  was  disposed  to  alter 
the  Prussian  conception  of  kingship,  and  favor  parliamen- 
tary control.  But  he  had  long  been  suffering  from  cancer 
in  the  throat,  and  when  at  last,  in  1888,  he  came  to  the 
throne  he  reigned  only  three  months,  and  his  ideas  left 
no  permanent  trace. 

The  third  and  last  of  the  sovereigns  of  the  German 
Empire  was  William  II.  He  had  been  a  great  admirer  of 
Bismarck  and  his  system  and  he  cherished  the  olden  ideas. 
"The  king's  will  is  the  supreme  law,"  he  declared  on  one 
occasion.  Strong  in  mind,  vigorous  and  aggressive,  he 
tried  to  take  part  in  all  things.  It  is  difficult  to  estimate 
his  ability,  and  his  character  remains  an  enigma.  So 
brilliant  was  his  success  for  a  time  that  some  considered 
him  a  genius,  while  there  were  not  a  few  who  whispered 
that  he  was  headstrong,  irresponsible,  and  rash.  There 
can  be  no  doubt,  however,  that  like  his  grandfather,  he 
tolerated  the  Reichstag,  looked  upon  the  ministers  as  his 
ministers,  and  was  resolved  to  abate  his  prerogative  not  a 
bit.     He  loved  to  conceive  of  himself  as  medieval  lord  or 


Frederick 
III,  1883 


William  II, 
1888-1918 


334  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

strong  knight.  Accordingly,  during  his  time  there  was 
little  change  in  the  German  Constitution,  or  in  the  spirit  of 
administering  it,  which  tended  to  bring  greater  participa- 
tion or  control  by  the  German  people. 
Origin  of  the  The  German  system  had  developed  from  circumstances 
German  very  different  from  those  which  prevailed  in  England  and 

system  ^j^^  United  States.     The  English-speaking  peoples,  pro- 

tected by  the  sea,  were  generally  safe  from  the  atl  acks  of 
their  foes;  and  in  this  favorable  condition  slowly  they  de- 
veloped government  controlled  by  the  people.  It  was  very 
different  in  Germany  and  in  Prussia.  Prussia  had  no  nat- 
ural frontiers  to  protect  her.  For  ages  Germany  was 
despised  by  her  enemies  because  she  was  weak  and  divided, 
and  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  her  people 
endured  almost  everything  that  invading  armies  and  law- 
less soldiery  could  inflict  upon  them.  Small  wonder  that 
at  last  they  desired  above  all  things  the  strength  of  union, 
and  prized  much  more  the  security  which  a  strong  ruler 
could  give  than  a  system  of  parliamentary  self-government. 
It  had  been  so  in  France  before  the  Hundred  Years'  War  was 
over,  and  in  England  after  the  fifteenth  century.  In  both 
countries  strong,  centralized,  and  despotic  government 
arose  and  flourished  for  a  long  time,  and  divine  right  was 
cherished  by  many  of  the  people.  Evil  conditions  had  con- 
tinued longer  in  Germany,  and  the  consequences  had 
persisted  longer.  At  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century 
there  were  many  who  desired  the  greater  liberalization  of 
\  their  government,  and  hoped  that  soon  there  might  be  a 
system  more  like  that  of  England,  with  ministers  respon- 
sible to  the  will  of  the  people;  but  there  were  a  great  many 
who  declared  that  the  German  system  was  not  only  better 
for  the  German  people  but  really  superior  to  the  other. 
They  said  that  the  personal  liberty  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
peoples  was  only  license,  that  jmrliamentary  control  could 
never  make  Germany  so  strong  or  well  fitted  for  the  great- 
ness before  her;  that  while  their  government  might  be 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


335 


"autocratic,"  it  was  far  more  efficient  than  the  "demo- 
cratic" systems  of  America  and  Britain;  and  that  it  was 
able  to  give  to  its  subjects  far  greater  happiness  and  good. 
They  were  governed  from  the  top,  but  they  were  governed 
well  and  were  better  off,  so  they  said,  than  any  other  people 
in  the  world.  Many  things  were  forbidden  {verhoten)  but 
this  was  only  restricting  the  behavior  of  individuals  for  the 
greater  good  of  them  all. 

It  should  be  said  that  in  one  respect  the  Germans  un- 
doubtedly had  more  success  than  Americans,  though  not 
more  than  the  British.  The  government  of  their  cities  was 
clean,  efficient,  and  well-administered,  as  British  municipal 
government  came  to  be.  It  is  well  known  that  the  people 
of  the  United  States  have  been  far  less  successful,  and  that 
especially  since  the  Civil  War  the  government  of  their 
cities  has  frequently  been  characterized  by  poor  manage- 
ment, corruption,  graft,  and  wasting  of  public  money. 

The  unification  of  Germany  brought  wonderful  pros- 
perity, and  this  strengthened  and  justified  the  government 
which  had  been  set  up.  After  the  Zollverein  was  formed, 
and  especially  after  the  North  German  Confederation  and 
Empire,  in  almost  every  form  of  endeavor  the  German 
people  went  forward  so  far,  that  it  seemed  at  last  only  a 
matter  of  time  when  they  would  be  first  in  whatever  they 
attempted. 

In  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  Germany  was 
mainly  an  agricultural  country.  For  most  people  living 
was  hard,  since  the  soil  was  poor;  and  accordingly  in  spite 
of  the  industry  of  the  people  the  wealth  of  the  country  was 
low.  All  through  the  following  period,  however,  the  most 
careful  fertilizing  and  the  best  methods  which  science  de- 
vised were  applied,  so  that  as  time  went  on  yields  were 
increased.  Moreover,  Germany  imposed  protective  duties 
to  aid  the  agricultural  classes.  This  was  done  not  only 
because  of  the  political  influence  of  the  Junkers,  but  be- 
cause the  government  desired  that  the  country  continue 


Excellent 
municipal 
government 


Economic 
advance 


Agriculture 


336 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Industrial 
growth 


Coal  and 
iron 


Causes 

of  industrial 

success 


to  raise  as  much  of  its  food  as  could  be.  The  result  was 
well  seen  when  the  Great  War  came.  Germany,  block- 
aded though  she  was,  held  out  for  more  than  four  years. 

Far  more  important  was  industrial  growth.  In  the 
second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  German  people 
left  their  hamlets  and  towns,  and  went  to  the  cities,  which 
increased  so  wondrously  that  whereas  in  1871  half  of  the 
population  had  been  engaged  in  agriculture,  in  1914  it  was 
less  than  a  third.  Berlin  grew  as  fast  as  Chicago  in  the 
New  World,  and  cities  which  had  been  quiet  places  since 
the  Thirty  Years'  War  awaked  and  expanded  and  became 
vast  emporiums  in  a  lifetime.  Up  and  down  the  valley 
of  the  Rhine,  in  Saxony,  and  in  Prussia,  there  were  huge 
factories  and  forests  of  chimneys  as  in  central  England,  or 
in  Pittsburgh,  or  Detroit. 

The  Germans  were  fortunate  in  having  the  basis  of  great 
industrial  development  in  great  stores  of  coal  and  iron. 
After  1871  coal  production  was  prodigiously  increased; 
and  in  course  of  time  Germany  came  to  be  the  greatest 
producer,  except  for  the  United  States,  of  pig-iron  and 
steel.  Before  the  Franco-Prussian  War  the  German  state 
had  no  great  supply  of  iron  ore,  but  in  Lorraine  the  new 
empire  acquired  a  part  of  the  Briey  Basin,  the  greatest 
deposit  of  ore  in  Europe.  The  deposit,  which  is  "low- 
grade"  was  not  deemed  very  valuable  until  the  later  dis- 
covery of  a  new  process  of  extraction  of  iron  from  the  ore. 
In  1910  the  German  Empire  drew  from  the  Lorraine  fields 
some  4,870,000  metric  tons  out  of  7,000,000.  It  was  after- 
ward said,  with  some  reason,  perhaps,  that  had  the  Ger- 
mans realized  the  value  of  this  possession,  they  would  have 
taken  all  of  it  when  they  made  the  Treaty  of  Frankfort. 

The  Germans  entered  upon  their  industrial  revolution 
later  than  the  English  or  the  French,  but  they  could  thus 
profit  by  the  experience  of  those  who  had  gone  before;  and 
it  was  soon  found  that  the  genius  of  the  German  for  or- 
ganization and  study  of  details  was  admirably  adapted 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


337 


for  the  large-scale  production  of  the  later  stages  of  the 
Industrial  Revolution.  German  workmen  were  accus- 
tomed to  work  for  low  wages  industriously  for  long  hours. 
The  rapidly  increasing  population  furnished  an  abundant 
supply  of  labor,  while  the  excellent  system  of  education, 
particularly  of  technical  instruction,  made  these  workmen 
able  to  sustain  any  competition.  In  no  other  country 
was  there  such  immense  scientific  activity  and  especially 
such  successful  adaptation  of  science  to  practical  uses. 
The  Germans  made  few  brilliant  discoveries,  but  by 
enormous  industry  and  patient  research  they  greatly  ex- 
tended scientific  knowledge  and  then  used  it  in  furthering 
their  industry  and  arts.  Soon  German  goods  were  being 
sold  all  over  the  world.  At  first  they  were  sold  because  of 
their  cheapness  rather  than  their  worth,  but  presently 
they  were  so  much  improved  that  their  reputation  was 
everywhere  known.  The  result  of  this  was  that  in  in- 
dustrial output  Germany  finally  exceeded  every  one  of 
her  rivals  save  only  the  United  States. 

The  rising  industry  was  protected  by  high  customs 
duties.  This  device  had  been  common  in  the  Middle  Ages 
and  later,  and  was  well-known  in  the  United  States.  Eng- 
land somewhat  earlier  had  adopted  the  policy  of  free  trade, 
but  Bismarck  was  convinced  that  laissez-jaire  was  wrong 
and  that  industry  and  commerce  should  be  regulated  and 
fostered  by  the  state.  In  1879  he  abandoned  free  trade 
and  caused  the  adoption  of  a  protective  tariff.  The  result 
was  tremendous  stimulation  of  the  industries  of  the  em- 
pire. 

Along  with  this  industrial  expansion  went  enormous 
increases  in  commerce.  Some  Germans  in  the  Middle 
Ages  had  been  great  mariners  and  merchants,  and  masters 
of  the  Hanseatic  League  were  long  renowned.  But  with 
the  discovery  of  America,  the  change  of  trade  routes, 
and  the  decline  of  German  power  all  of  this  completely  dis- 
appeared, and  in  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 


Protection 


Commercial 
development 


838  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

German  ships  were  seldom  seen  in  foreign  ports.  After  the 
middle  of  the  century  came  a  change.  Gradually  a  vast 
fleet  of  ships  was  created,  the  government  assisting  by 
subsidies  and  state  supervision.  After  1900  the  Hamburg- 
America  and  the  North  German  Lloyd  steamship  com- 
panies had  few  rivals  anywhere  in  the  world.  Hamburg 
was  the  greatest  sea-port  on  the  continent,  and  from  a 
lowly  position  Germany  had  in  shipping  and  commerce 
passed  all  her  competitors  except  England. 
Trade  As  a  consequence  of  this  development  great  quantities 

expansion  of  German  goods  were  sold  all  over  the  world.  Gradually 
the  Russian  market  came  largely  under  German  control, 
immense  progress  was  made  in  South  America,  and  there 
was  no  part  of  the  world  where  German  merchants  and 
traders  were  not  seen.  They  displayed  great  ingenuity 
and  skill  in  opening  new  markets.  They  not  only  tried 
to  make  cheaper  goods,  and  sometimes  better  goods,  but 
they  took  great  pains  to  study  their  customers'  desires  and 
then  suit  their  wishes.  The  attitude  of  the  English  and 
others  was  that  the  customer,  if  he  bought,  must  buy  the 
goods  as  the  manufacturer  made  them.  The  Germans 
sent  out  commercial  representatives  to  study  the  markets, 
find  what  customers  wanted,  and  offer  them  easy  terms. 
As  the  most  enterprising  young  men  of  Britain  went  out 
to  govern  or  work  in  the  colonial  possessions,  so  from  Ger- 
many they  went  out  to  reside  in  other  countries,  learn  the 
language  of  the  inhabitants,  their  customs,  and  wishes,  and 
^  establish  business  connections  with  them.     Not  all  the 

success  that  followed  came  merely  from  the  care  of  Ger- 
man merchants  and  their  representatives  abroad.  Not  a 
little  of  it  was  because  the  government  constantly  lent 
powerful  assistance  to  forwarding  and  increasing  German 
trade;  and  some  of  the  methods  by  which  this  was  accom- 
plished afterward  seemed  insidious  and  unfair,  not  unlike 
those  by  which  "trusts"  and  monopolies  were  built  up 
in  the  United  States. 


THE   GERMAN  EMPIRE 


339 


This  making  and  selling  of  goods  was  accompanied  by 
tremendous  growth  in  population  and  wealth.  Before  the 
empire  the  Germans  were  a  poor  people.  The  wealthy 
states  were  Great  Britain  and  France,  with  the  United 
States  of  America  rising  up  like  a  giant  and  presently  sur- 
passing them  both.  But  in  the  two  generations  after  1871 
Germany  accumulated  vast  stores  of  wealth  until  she  over- 
took and  passed  older  rivals.  Just  before  the  Great  War 
it  was  estimated  that  the  wealth  of  France  was  perhaps 
more  than  50  billion  dollars,  that  of  Great  Britain  between 
80  and  90,  that  of  the  German  Empire  between  80  and  90, 
that  of  the  United  States  about  200  billions.  By  that  time 
indeed,  it  was  believed  that  Germany  had  passed  every 
rival  except  the  United  States,  though  she  always  re- 
mained at  immeasurable  distance  behind  that  wealthy  and 
fortunate  country. 

Marvellous  achievement  and  increasing  wealth  were 
partly  the  cause  and  partly  the  result  of  increase  in  number 
of  people.  In  1816  there  were  within  the  limits  of  what 
afterward  became  the  empire  24,000,000  people.  In 
1837  the  number  had  risen  to  31,000,000;  the  German 
Empire  began  in  1871  with  41,000,000;  by  1890  there  were 
49,000,000;  in  1900,  56,000,000;  in  1910,  65,000,000;  and 
in  1914  the  number  was  believed  to  be  little  short  of 
70,000,000.  By  that  time  the  increase  was  nearly  a 
million  a  year.  During  the  nineteenth  century  the  popu- 
lation of  Great  Britain  had  risen  from  10,500,000  to 
40,000,000;  that  of  France  from  27,000,000  to  barely 
40,000,000.  At  the  beginning  of  that  century  France  had 
been  the  most  populous  of  the  highly  civilized  states  of 
Europe;  but  just  before  the  war  she  had  been  so  far 
displaced  that  Germany  had  nearly  twice  as  many  people. 
This  increase  made  Germany  more  powerful,  and  also 
richer,  since  it  constantly  gave  her  a  larger  number  of 
workingmen  who  labored  and  produced  goods  and  wealth. 
The  country  seemed  well  able  to  support  them.     Once 


National 
wealth 


Growth 
of  popula- 
tion 


340 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


BeUef  in 
need  for 
more 
territory 


Contest  with 
the  Church 


there  had  been  a  large  emigration  of  Germans  to  America 
and  other  places,  but  this  had  come  altogether  to  an  end, 
and  all  her  people  now  found  employment.  None  the  less 
it  was  increasingly  apparent  that  so  large  a  number,  as  was 
the  case  with  England,  could  not  be  fed  from  the  Father- 
land's resources,  and  that  they  could  be  maintained  only 
so  long  as  Germany  made  goods  which  she  was  able  to  sell 
in  other  countries.  As  time  went  on  this  was  more  diffi- 
cult, and,  as  will  be  seen,  there  was  increasing  belief  that 
she  must  have  more  territory  to  accommodate  her  enlarging 
population,  that  she  required  colonies,  and  ought  to  have 
her  own  sources  of  supply  of  raw  materials. 

The  first  of  the  great  domestic  problems  which  con- 
fronted the  new  empire  was  a  struggle  with  its  catholic 
subjects.  The  Reformation  made  Germany  protestant, 
but  the  counter-reformation  won  many  of  the  people 
back  to  the  older  faith,  and  a  little  later  the  result  of  the 
Thirty  Years'  War  left  the  German  people  partly  in  protes- 
tant and  partly  in  catholic  states.  After  1648  there  was 
little  trouble,  since  with  respect  to  religion  the  different 
states  went  their  own  way,  unhampered  by  the  weak  gov- 
ernment of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  which  bound  them 
together  so  loosely.  But  the  empire  founded  in  1871 
bound  firmly  together  protestant  north  Germany  and  the 
Catholics  of  the  Rhine  and  the  south,  and  brought  them 
all  under  a  strong  central  power.  It  is  said  that  Bismarck 
wished  to  assert  the  supremacy  of  the  state  power  over  the 
Church.  The  occasion  was  ready  at  hand.  In  1870  the 
Vatican  Council  affirmed  the  doctrine  that  the  Pope, 
speaking  ex  cathedra,  or  in  the  capacity  of  pontiff,  was 
infallible,  not  able  to  err.  This  doctrine,  so  counter  to 
many  of  the  tendencies  of  the  time,  was  not  assented  to  by 
some  of  the  German  Catholics.  Accordingly,  they  were 
excommunicated,  attacked  by  the  orthodox  catholic 
clergy,  deprived  of  positions,  and  denied  participation  in 
the  rites  of  the  Church.   They  appealed  to  the  government 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


341 


for  protection,  and  at  this  point  Bismarck  intervened.  It 
seemed  to  him  and  to  others  that  the  doctrine  of  papal 
infalhbility  implied  superiority  of  the  Church  over  the 
State.  Accordingly  a  religious  conflict  began^famous  then 
and  since  as  the  Kulturkampf  (struggle  for  civilization). 
Strong  measures  were  taken:  religious  orders  were  forbid- 
den to  teach  and  Jesuits  were  expelled  from  Germany. 
Then  in  the  Falk  Laws,  passed  in  Prussia,  1873-5,  the  State 
was  given  control  over  the  education  and  appointment  of 
clergy,  and  some  control  over  the  dismissal  of  priests;  a 
law  was  passed  making  civil  marriage  compulsory;  and  all 
religious  orders  were  suppressed. 

A  bitter  conflict  ensued.  Catholics  protested;  the  Pope 
declared  the  laws  of  no  effect;  the  clergy  refused  to  obey 
them  and  were  supported  by  the  strict  Catholics  in  their 
congregations.  Those  who  disobeyed  were  punished  by 
fine  and  imprisonment,  and  the  most  recalcitrant  were 
expelled  from  the  country.  Soon  many  bishoprics  were 
vacant;  everywhere  churches  were  closed  and  religious 
services  suspended;  and  presently  there  was  the  trouble 
and  disturbance  of  life  that  had  used  to  follow  conflict  be- 
tween Church  and  State  in  the  Middle  Ages.  The  contest 
was  bitter  and  prolonged.  "We  shall  not  go  to  Canossa,'* 
said  Bismarck,  recalling  the  old-time  victory  of  Pope  Greg- 
ory VII.  But  Bismarck  could  not  win  complete  triumph. 
Under  persecution  the  Catholics  rallied  and  strengthened 
their  resistance.  In  1871  a  Catholic  Party  had  been  or- 
ganized, and,  as  the  party  of  the  Center,  had  become  im- 
portant in  the  Reichstag.  Now  it  became  the  largest  one 
in  that  body.  The  policy  of  sternness  accomplished  but 
little.  Bismarck  antagonized  one  of  the  most  conservative 
elements  in  the  empire,  and  presently  he  needed  the  assis- 
tance of  conservatives  against  what  seemed  to  him  the 
rising  tide  of  socialist  and  radical  agitation.  Accordingly 
most  of  the  anti-clerical  laws  were  repealed,  though  civil 
marriage  and  state  regulation  of  schools  were  retained.    By 


The 

Kultur- 

kampf 


Bismarck 
retreats 


342 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 
socialists 


Repression 
of  the 
socialists 


1887  the  conflict  was  at  an  end,  the  Catholic  Party  aban- 
doned opposition  and  gave  Bismarck  the  support  which 
he  needed  for  a  policy  which  it  approved.  After  that  time 
the  Center  Party,  the  strongest  and  most  solid  in  the 
empire,  remained  on  guard,  ever  watchful  of  its  own  pe- 
culiar interests. 

The  conflict  to  which  Bismarck  and  German  conserva- 
tives now  turned  was  with  socialism,  which  had  lately  been 
making  rapid  progress.  The  socialists  were  considered 
dangerous  and  unpatriotic.  These  were  the  first  glorious 
years  of  the  new  empire,  when  Germans  were  aglow  with 
patriotic  pride;  but  Liebknecht  and  Bebel  and  others  had 
opposed  the  North  German  Confederation,  the  empire, 
the  war  with  France,  and  the  taking  of  Alsace-Lorraine. 
They  cared  not  for  military  glory  and  greatness  of  domin- 
ion but  the  rise  and  betterment  of  men  and  women.  They^ 
had  no  admiration  for  Bismarck  or  Moltke  and  not  much 
for  the  emperor  and  his  court.  As  these  radicals  got  to 
be  better  known  they  became  more  hated  and  feared. 
The  governing  and  conservative  classes  dreaded  the  un- 
doing of  the  great  work  just  accomplished;  the  emperoi 
looked  upon  socialists  as  enemies  of  himself,  and  Bismarck 
longed  for  a  chance  to  repress  them  completely.  It  was 
largely  for  this  reason,  because  he  regarded  socialists  as 
more  dangerous  than  clericals,  that  he  ended  the  Kultur- 
kampf.  In  1878,  in  swift  succession,  two  attempts  to 
assassinate  William  were  made  by  socialist  adherents. 
Socialists  denounced  these  deeds  and  disclaimed  all  re- 
sponsibility for  them;  but  there  was  a  great  wave  of  anger, 
and  it  seemed  that  the  time  was  at  hand  for  crushing  so- 
cialism in  Geroiany  completely. 

Bismarck  now  entered  upon  another  campaign  of  perse- 
cution and  repression,  like  that  against  the  Catholics,  from 
which  he  was  just  drawing  back.  In  1878  a  drastic  law 
forbade  all  publications,  all  gatherings,  all  associations 
having  "socialistic  tendencies."    Martial  law  might  be 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE  343 

used  so  that  the  government  could  easily  get  rid  of  social- 
ists by  removing  them  from  the  protection  of  the  civil 
courts.  This  legislation  re-enacted  remained  in  force  un- 
til 1890.  During  that  time  it  was  sternly  applied,  a  great 
number  of  socialist  publications  were  stopped,  and  many 
socialists  imprisoned  or  expelled  from  the  country.  But 
again  this  whole  policy  of  repression  was  a  failure.  Under 
persecution,  leaders  and  their  disciples  became  bolder  and 
more  active;  and  their  doctrines,  now  brought  to  the  atten- 
tion of  more  people,  won  many  new  converts.  The  Social- 
ist Party  grew  steadily  in  this  time  of  degradation,  and  by 
1890  was  thrice  as  large  as  in  the  year  when  the  perse- 
cution began.  By  that  time  it  was  so  clear  that  Bismarck's 
policy  was  a  failure  that  the  repressive  measures  were 
dropped. 

Yet  he  was  largely  successful  because  he  employed  an-  state 
other  method  against  them.  He  himself  became  one  of  the  socialism 
foremost  leaders  in  social  reform  in  Europe,  and  undertook 
to  have  the  state  do  the  best  of  what  he  thought  the  social- 
ists were  striving  to  bring  about.  In  effect  he  went  further 
than  any  statesman  before  him  in  establishing  state  social- 
ism and  so  leaving  the  socialists  with  nothing  to  fight  for. 
He  and  the  emperor  strongly  believed  that  the  best  inter- 
ests of  the  state  lay  in  advancing  the  welfare  of  the  work- 
ing class,  that  the  state  should  interest  itself  more  than 
previously  in  assisting  those  who  needed  help,  and  that 
then  the  workingmen  would  cease  to  go  after  socialist 
leaders.  ^  The  measures  which  Bismarck  proposed  encoun- 
tered almost  as  much  opposition  as,  thirty  years  later,  the 
reforms  of  Mr.  Lloyd  George  in  England;  conservatives 
were  alarmed  at  such  innovation,  and  socialists  denounced 
them  as  not  touching  the  root  of  the  evils  which  they  prom- 
ised to  cure.  Gradually,  however,  the  program  was  carried 
through.  In  1883  a  Sickness  Insurance  Law  was  passed, 
the  employer  to  pay  a  part  and  the  employee  a  larger  part 
of  the  necessary  premiums.    In  1884  and  1885  Accident 


844 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Government 
and  people 


Slow  prog- 
ress of 
democracy 
in  the 
Empire 


Insurance  Laws  were  passed,  the  employer  to  insure  all  his 
employees  entirely  at  his  own  expense.  In  1889  came  an 
Old  Age  Insurance  Law,  the  premiums  to  be  paid  by  the 
employers,  the  employees,  and  the  state. 

This  legislation  was  revolutionary  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. It  was  afterward  widely  studied,  and  was  being 
more  and  more  followed  before  the  Great  War  temporarily 
ended  social  amendment.  In  Germany  it  had  great  suc- 
cess. The  Socialist  Party,  it  is  true,  constantly  increased 
the  number  of  its  adherents.  Nevertheless,  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that  by  1914  a  great  many  Germans  considered 
themselves  better  taken  care  of  by  their  government  than 
any  other  people  in  the  world;  and  it  is  probably  true  that 
nowhere  else  had  the  state  been  so  successful  in  getting  rid 
of  the  worst  forms  of  misery  and  distress.  There  were 
many  poor  people  in  Germany,  toiling  for  scanty. wages 
and  working  for  very  long  hours,  but  nowhere  the  fear- 
ful poverty  and  physical  deterioration  to  be  seen  in  the 
slums  of  the  English  cities  or  the  worst  places  in  the 
United  States.  The  German  government  was  guarantee- 
ing a  certain  minimum  to  its  people,  to  make  them  content, 
and  to  provide  that  the  state  might  not  be  weakened  by 
losing  their  service.  All  this  contributed,  moreover,  to  the 
centralization  of  the  powers  of  the  government  and  the 
greater  supremacy  of  the  state. 

Usually  the  progress  of  industrialism,  which  caused  large 
numbers  of  people  to  come  together  in  manufacturing  cen- 
ters, and  the  spread  of  education,  which  made  the  masses 
of  the  people  more  capable  of  self-government  and  also 
more  interested  in  governing  themselves,  had  brought 
about  larger  participation  by  the  people  in  their  govern- 
ment and  increasing  desire  for  more  share.  So  it  had 
been  for  a  long  time  in  England  and  in  France,  in  the 
Scandinavian  countries,  in  Belgium  and  Holland,  and 
there  had  long  been  persistent  efforts  made  by  a  few  people 
in  Russia.    In  Germany,  where  one  of  the  widest  and  most 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE  345 

effective  systems  of  education  had  prevailed  throughout 
the  nineteenth  century,  and  where  for  the  past  fifty  years 
there  had  been  unceasing  drift  of  people  from  the  farms  to 
the  cities,  the  progress  of  democracy  always  seemed  very 
slow  before  the  disasters  of  the  Great  War. 

This  was  partly  because  of  old  associations  and  tradi-  Causes 
tions.  In  England  self-government  and  democracy  grew 
up  slowly  and  painfully  through  a  long  course  of  time; 
they  were  inherited  by  the  English  colonists  of  America 
and  there  developed  under  still  more  favorable  conditions; 
in  France  they  were  violently  begun  during  the  time  of 
the  French  Revolution,  and  then  after  repeated  failures 
they  were  gradually  established.  Germans,  too,  had  sought 
these  things  and  tried  to  bring  them  about,  but  they  were 
always  confronted  with  the  more  pressing  problem  of  uni- 
fication, which  England  and  France  had  long  before 
achieved.  When  finally  German  unity  was  effected,  it  was 
brought  about  under  the  leadership  of  Prussia,  always 
less  influenced  by  democratic  tendencies  than  the  south 
and  the  west.  It  was  the  ideas  of  Bismarck  and  the  con- 
servatives which  predominated  in  making  the  constitution 
of  the  empire.  It  was  a  pity  that  the  unification  could 
not  have  been  accomplished  by  liberal  and  peaceful  Ger- 
mans instead  of  through  conquest  and  force.  In  1870 
Emile  Ollivier,  French  premier,  who  strove  so  hard  to  avert 
war  with  Prussia,  urged  his  countrymen  not  to  oppose  "the 
natural  movement  of  German  unity."  "If,"  he  said, 
"we  allow  it  to  complete  itself  quietly  by  successive  stages, 
it  will  not  give  supremacy  to  the  barbarous  and  sophistical 
Germany,  it  will  assure  it  to  the  Germany  of  intellect  and 
culture.  War,  on  the  other  hand,  would  establish,  during 
a  time  impossible  to  calculate,  the  domination  .  .  . 
of  the  Junkers  and  the  pedants."  So  it  was.  Great  suc- 
cess in  the  wars  strengthened  the  conservatives  who  had 
brought  them  about  and  disarmed  their  opponents. 
Afterward  it  seemed  to  many  Germans  that  their  country, 


846  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

surrounded  by  older  powers  and,  perhaps,  by  enemies, 
could  only  keep  her  position  by  being  strong  and  ever  on 
guard.  All  through  Bismarck's  period,  therefore,  the 
central  government  retained  its  power  and  its  hold  on  the 
aflFection  of  most  of  the  people.  As  conditions  altered  and 
a  larger  number  desired  some  change,  it  was  always  possi- 
ble for  the  ruling  class  to  divert  their  attention  or  thwart 
their  wishes.  So  long  as  the  immense  prosperity  and  ex- 
pansion of  the  German  Empire  continued,  there  were 
not  a  great  many  who  would  resolutely  oppose  the  rulers; 
and  generally  the  prosperity  continued. 
The  govern-  Moreover,  Germany  of  the  twentieth  century  had 
ment  resists  mighty  ambitions,  constantly  taught  to  her  people,  which 
alarmed  other  European  powers,  and  in  the  years  1904-7  a 
combination  of  France,  Russia,  and  England  was  effected. 
To  the  inhabitants  of  these  countries  this  agreement  seemed 
necessary  because  of  probable  danger  from  the  German 
Empire;  but  German  leaders  easily  persuaded  the  people 
that  neighboring  powers  had  combined  to  encircle  and 
crush  the  Fatherland,  which  could  be  saved  only  if  the 
army  remained  powerful  and  the  government  strong. 
These  arguments  were  ridiculed  by  socialists  and  they 
became  less  effective  in  time.  It  was  partly  because  of  the 
increasing  demand  for  more  democratic  control  that  the 
Social-Democratic  party  increased  so  greatly.  In  1912  it 
received  more  than  four  million  votes,  getting  its  support 
not  only  from  socialists  but  from  liberals  who  did  not 
greatly  favor  socialist  doctrines.  Nevertheless,  little 
was  really  accomplished.  The  movement  to  make  minis- 
ters responsible  to  the  Reichstag  came  to  nothing;  the  de- 
mand that  representation  be  reapportioned  in  accordance 
with  changes  of  population  went  unheeded  year  after  year; 
and  the  antiquated  Prussian  Constitution  continued  to 
keep  power  and  privilege  for  the  few.  In  the  midst  of  the 
Great  War,  when  the  government,  failing  in  its  design  of 
getting  a  grand  victory  quickly,  was  compelled  to  seek  the 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 


347 


utmost  assistance  from  its  people  in  a  long  and  exhausting 
contest,  the  beginning  of  reform  was  made  at  last,  and 
promise  was  given  that  after  the  war  something  more  would 
be  done.  But  all  this  came  too  late;  for  presently  Ger- 
many went  down  in  defeat,  and  the  old  system  crumbled  to 
pieces.  Whether  the  Germans  really  desire  to  establish  a 
democracy,  can  only  be  known  in  the  future. 

It  was  so  with  the  army.  By  war,  it  seemed,  Prussia 
had  risen;  the  army  had  been  the  foundation  of  the  em- 
pire. Furthermore,  Prussian  universal  military  service 
had  created  a  national  army,  in  which  most  of  the  young 
men  had  some  part.  For  these  reasons  the  army  was 
cherished  and  generally  high  in  esteem.  And  it  was  so 
entrenched  in  the  organization  of  the  state  that  it  seemed 
to  have  impregnable  position.  Its  officers  and  leaders, 
drawn  mostly  from  the  aristocratic  class,  constituted  a 
military  caste,  who  on  occasion  assumed  such  privileges 
that  they  seemed  to  be  above  the  law.  Officers  sometimes 
treated  civilians  with  violence  or  with  the  utmost  con- 
tempt, and  it  was  always  difficult  in  such  affairs  to  get  any 
redress  from  the  courts.  In  1913  a  certain  Lieutenant  von 
Forstner  at  Zabern  in  Alsace  declared  that  instead  of  pun- 
ishing a  soldier  who  had  stabbed  an  Alsatian  he  would  have 
given  him  a  reward  for  his  trouble;  and  he  himself  struck 
a  lame  cobbler  on  the  forehead  with  his  sword.  The  mat- 
ter went  to  the  Reichstag ,  where  it  was  bitterly  condemned. 
Von  Forstner  was  tried  by  court  martial  but  no  punish- 
ment followed.  There  were  mass  meetings  in  Germany  to 
protest  and  much  feeling  was  aroused;  but  that  year  the 
government  was  teaching  the  people  that  great  danger 
threatened  the  country,  especially  from  the  Russians,  and 
the  German  army  was  increased  to  greater  size  than  ever 
before. 

Essentially  autocratic  rule  associated  with  militarism 
caused  the  treatment  accorded  to  the  alien  subjects  in  the 
empire.     The  British  Empire  had   grown  great  largely 


848  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

through  generous  toleration.  French  Canadians  were 
never  troubled  about  their  religion  or  their  language,  and 
the  Boers  within  the  British  Empire  kept  all  the  rights 
which  they  had  fought  to  defend.  Even  in  Ireland,  where 
England's  greatest  failure  had  been.  Irishmen  were  never 
coerced  into  abandoning  the  Gaelic  language,  though  in 
the  course  of  time  most  of  them  of  their  own  accord 
adopted  English.  But  in  countries  like  Russia  and  Ger- 
many, of  the  regime  before  the  Great  War,  it  seemed  to  the 
rulers  all-important  that  all  their  subjects  should  be  Rus- 
sian or  German.  Accordingly,  in  Russia  the  Poles  and  the 
Finns  were  subjected  to  grievous  persecution.  In  the 
German  Empire  Frenchmen  in  Alsace-Lorraine,  Danes  in 
Schleswig,  and  the  Poles  of  Posen,  were  treated  as  inferiors 
and  subjected  to  great  discrimination. 
Alsace-  When  in  1871  Alsace-Lorraine  was  annexed  to  the  em- 

Lorraine  pjj.g  ^jjg  inhabitants  protested  at  the  forcible  separation 

from  France.  Bismarck  believed  that,  with  the  passing 
away  of  the  generation  that  had  known  French  rule,  attach- 
ment to  France  would  disappear.  The  strongest  French 
sympathizers  left  the  country,  and  their  places  were  taken 
by  emigrants  from  the  German  states  of  the  Empire.  But 
Alsace-Lorraine  was  given  a  dependent  and  inferior  status, 
as  the  Reichsland,  or  imperial  territory.  It  had  neither 
influence  in  the  empire  nor  sufficient  self-government  for 
itself.  Therefore,  as  time  passed  the  feeling  of  discontent 
did  not  wane,  love  for  the  old  memories  of  France  did  not 
die,  and  German  immigrants  themselves  denounced  the 
position  of  the  Reichsland,  The  German  authorities 
strove  to  compel  obedience  and  contentment;  but  they 
only  increased  the  irritation.  Then  they  added  to  the 
garrisons  and  subjected  the  provinces  to  very  strict  mili- 
tary rule.  This  was  resented  still  further.  As  far  as 
possible  French  things  were  proscribed,  and  one  boy  of 
twelve  was  imprisoned  for  whistling  the  tune  of  the 
Marseillaise.     German  rulers  did  not  realize  as  clearly  as 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE  349 

some  foreigners  that  what  the  inhabitants  of  the  Reichsland 
wanted  most  of  all  was  not  return  to  France,  but  self- 
government.  In  1911  a  new  constitution  was  granted,  but 
it  was  not  satisfactory  to  the  people.  After  forty  years 
nothing,  aside  from  force,  really  held  the  population  to  the 
empire  except  their  increasingly  prosperous  industrial  life, 
which  was  closely  connected  with  German  industry  and 
mostly  dependent  upon  it. 

The  German  authorities  so  dealt  with  these  provinces  The  Poles 
largely  from  strategic  considerations,  and  they  would  have 
felt  safer  if  the  Reichsland  had  been  inhabited  entirely  by 
Germans.  The  same  reason  had  much  to  do  with  their 
treatment  of  the  Poles  in  West  Prussia  and  Posen.  The 
Polish  districts  of  Prussia  lay  right  where  Russian  invaders 
might  strike  deep  into  the  empire.  Their  country,  which 
had  once  been  taken  from  Poland,  had  contained  many 
people  who  spoke  German,  and  with  good  treatment  in 
time  all  of  them  might  have  been  made  loyal  subjects. 
It  was  considered  necessary,  however,  to  make  them  thor- 
oughly German.  Bismarck  wished  to  prevent  the  use  of 
Polish  in  their  public  schools,  and  he  desired  to  populate 
the  country  with  German  peasants;  but  presently  more 
lenient  treatment  was  accorded.  Repressive  measures 
were  undertaken  in  earnest,  however,  after  a  while,  when 
it  was  seen  clearly  that  the  Poles  were  not  giving  up  their 
own  national  feeling.  As  in  Alsace-Lorraine,  newspapers 
were  suppressed  and  many  people  fined  and  imprisoned. 
In  1901  it  was  ordered  that  religious  instruction  in  the 
schools  should  be  given  in  German.  Polish  teachers  were 
taken  from  their  positions,  school  children  were  forbidden 
to  pray  in  Polish,  and  Poles  were  forbidden  to  use  their 
language  in  public  assemblies.  In  1907  the  Prussian  gov- 
ernment passed  a  law  by  which  Polish  owners  might  be 
compelled  to  sell  their  land,  so  that  their  estates  might  get 
into  German  possession;  and  in  1913  a  great  sum  of  money 
was  appropriated  for  the  purpose  of  colonizing  Prussian 


350  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

Poland  with  Germans.  Polish  peasants  were  even  forbid- 
den to  build  houses  upon  their  own  land.  Little  more 
was  accomplished,  however,  than  making  the  Poles  burn 
with  hatred  and  desire  to  be  free  from  the  masters  who 
oppressed  them. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General  accounts:  J.  E.  Barker,  Modem  Germany  (1905,  last 
ed.  1919);  H.  Blum,  Das  Deutsche  Reich  zur  Zeit  Bismarcks 
(1893) ;  W.  H.  Dawson,  The  Evolution  of  Modem  Germany  (ed. 
1919);  R.  H.  Fife,  jr..  The  German  Empire  between  Two  Wars 
(1916);  Karl  Lamprecht,  Deutsche  Geschichte  der  Jungsten  Ver- 
gangenheit  und  Gegenwart,  %  vols.  /1912-13);  Henri  Lichten- 
berger,  VAllemagne  Modeme;  Son  Evolution  (1907),  trans,  by 
A.  M.  Ludovici  (1913);  H.  von  Sybel,  Die  Begriindung  des 
Deutschen  Reichs  durch  Wilhelm  7,  7  vols.  (5th  ed.  revised,  1889- 
94),  biassed,  but  based  upon  the  sources;  Charles  Tower,  Ger- 
many of  To-day  (1913). 

Bismarck:  the  best  biography  in  English  is  C.  G.  Robertson, 
Bismarck  (1919);  in  German  the  best  is  Erich  Marcks,  Otto 
von  Bismarck:  ein  Lehenshild  (1918),  a  masterly  study,  and  a 
larger  work,  Bismarck:  eine  Biographicy  vol.  I  (1909);  G.  Egel- 
haaf,  Bismarck^  Sein  Leben  und  Sein  Werk  (1911);  J.  W.  Head- 
lam,  Bismarck  and  the  Foundation  of  the  German  Empire  (1899); 
H.  Kohl,  Fiirst  Bismarck:  Regesten  zu  einer  Wissenschaftlichen 
BiographiCy  2  vols.  (1891-2),  containing  important  parts  of  let- 
ters and  speeches;  Moritz  Busch  (English  trans.),  Bismarck — 
Some  Secret  Pages  of  His  History y  2  vols.  (1898),  the  diary  of  one 
who  had  official  and  private  intercourse  with  Bismarck;  Max 
Lenz,  Geschichte  Bismarcks  (1902) ;  Paul  Matter,  Bismarck  et  son 
Temps,  3  vols.  (1905-8),  perhaps  the  best  of  the  longer  biogra- 
phies at  present;  J.  Penzler,  Fiirst  Bismarck  nach  Seiner  Ent- 
lassung  (1897-8);  Munroe  Smith,  Bismarck  and  German  Unity 
(2d  ed.  1910). 

Bismarck's  utterances  and  writings:  Otto,  Fiirst  von  Bis- 
marck, Gedanken  und  ErinnerungeUy  2  vols.  (1898),  trans,  by 
A.  J.  Butler,  Reflections  and  Reminiscences,  2  vols.  (1899);  L. 
Hahn,  Fiirst  Bismarck,  Sein  Politisches  Leben  und  Wirken,  5  vols 
(1878-91),  for  speeches,  dispatches, and  political  letters;  H.  Kohl, 
Die   PolUischen  Reden  des  Fiirsten  Bismarck,  14  vols.  (1892- 


THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE  351 

1905) ;  Hermann  Hofmann,  Furst  Bismarck,  1890-1898,  2  vols. 
(1913),  contains  Bismarck's  important  critical  contributions  to 
the  Hamburger  Nachrichten. 

Other  biographies:  Erich  Marcks,  Kaiser  Wilhelm  I  (5th  ed. 
1905),  excellent. 

Government :  if  the  student  finds  it  desirable  and  convenient, 
he  will  obtain  a  vast  amount  of  curious  and  interesting  informa- 
tion from  the  proceedings  of  the  Reichstag,  Stenographische 
Berichte  ilber  die  Verhandlungen  des  Reichstags  (1871-  );  B 

E.  Howard,  The  German  Empire  (1906);  Paul  Laband,  Das 
Staatsrecht  des  Deutschen  Reiches,  4  vols.  (4th  ed.  1901),  the 
standard  treatise,  Deutsches  Reichstaatsrecht  (6th  ed.  1912) ;  H.  G. 
James,  Principles  of  Prussian  Administration  (1913);  Gaetan 
(Vicomte)  Combes  de  Lestrade,  Les  Monarchies  de  VEmpire 
Allemand,  Organisation  Constitutionelle  et  Administrative  (1904), 
excellent;  Oskar  Stillich,  Die  Politischen  Parteien  in  Deutschland, 
vols.  I,  II  (1908,  1911);  W.  H.  Dawson,  Municipal  Life  and 
Government  in  Germany  (1914). 

The  Kulturkampf;  Georges  Goyau,  Bismarck  et  VEglise: 
le  Culturkampf,  1870-1887,  4  vols.  (1911-13),  best  on  the  sub- 
ject. 

Socialism  and  the  state:  Charles  Andler,  Les  Origines  du 
Socialisme  d'Etat  en  Allemagne  (ed.  1911);  W.  H.  Dawson,  Bis- 
marck and  State  Socialism  (1891),  The  German  Workman 
(1906),  Social  Insurance  in  Germany,  1883-1911  (1912),  all  ex- 
cellent; August  Bebel,  Aus  Meinem  Leben,  3  vols.  (1910-14), 
abridged  trans.  My  Life  (1912). 

Alsace-Lorraine:  Barry  Cerf,  Alsace-Lorraine  since  1870 
(1919). 


Position 
of   the    new 
Empire 


CHAPTER    III 

THE     LEADERSHIP     OF     GERMANY  — 
THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 

Wir  liegen  mitten  in  Europa.  Wir  haben  mindestens  drei  AngriflFs- 
fronten  .  .  .  Gott  hat  uns  in  eine  Situation  gesetzt,  in  welcher 
wir  durch  unsere  Nachbarn  daran  verhindert  werden,  irgendwie  in 
Tragheit  oder  Versumpfung  zu  gerathen.  Er  hat  uns  die  krieg- 
erischste  und  unruhigste  Nation,  die  Franzosen,  an  die  Seite  gesetzt, 
und  er  hat  in  Russland  kriegerische  Neigungen  gross  werden  lassen 
.  .  .  Wir  Deutschen  fiirchten  Gott,  aber  sonst  nichts  in  der 
Welt. 

Bismarck  in  the  Rdchstagy  February  6,  1888:  Stenographische 

Berichte,  1887-1888,  pp.  727,  728,  733. 

After  1871  Bismarck's  greater  tasks  were  still  with 
foreign  affairs.  The  new  German  Empire  was  a  powerful 
state  of  41,000,000  people;  it  was  larger  than  France,  in 
strong  military  position,  flushed  with  victory  and  the 
prestige  of  enormous  success.  But  it  was,  indeed,  a  new 
state,  a  newcomer  among  old  neighbors,  apt  to  be  regarded 
as  intruder  and  upstart.  It  had  completely  upset  the  old 
balance  of  power,  and  there  was  bound  to  be  diflSculty  in 
adjusting  equilibrium  again.  The  German  Empire  had 
risen  on  the  downfall  of  Austria  and  of  France.  The  Aus- 
trians  might  try  to  regain  the  position  they  had  lost,  and 
the  French  proclaimed,  some  Germans  now  declare,  that 
they  will  have  their  revenge.  The  position  of  Germany 
was  very  strong,  for  in  between  other  great  powers  she 
could  strike  out,  if  necessary,  at  one  or  the  other;  but  the 
converse  of  this  was  that  a  hostile  alliance  of  surround- 
ing powers  might  be  able  to  crush  her  completely. 

852 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 


353 


It  was  the  task  of  Bismarck  now  to  keep  what  had  been 
gained,  to  prevent  the  formation  of  an  unfriendly  alHance, 
to  isolate  Germany's  foes,  to  make  new  friends  and  keep 
the  old  ones.  He  succeeded  magnificently  in  all  this. 
Great  as  had  been  his  success  in  the  unifying  of  Germany, 
his  success  in  keeping  the  unity,  prosperity,  and  command- 
ing position  of  the  German  Empire  was  still  more  striking. 
When  he  retired  in  1890,  the  foundations  of  the  Empire 
seemed  impregnable;  Germany  was  the  center  of  a  powerful 
alliance,  and  on  friendly  terms  with  the  other  great  powers; 
while  France  continued  in  the  ^onely  isolation  in  which 
her  disaster  had  left  her.  • 

The  friendship  of  Italy  and  Russia  had  already  been 
obtained.  At  once  Bismarck  proceeded  to  grander  de- 
signs. He  desired  to  draw  together  in  close  friendship  and 
alliance  the  German  Empire,  Austria-Hungary,  and  Rus- 
sia. He  had  had  something  of  this  in  mind  in  1866,  when 
terms  were  made  with  Austria  defeated.  By  the  Peace 
of  Prague  Austria  lost  no  territory,  except  Venetia  to  Italy, 
and  paid  almost  no  indemnity,  while  everything  possible 
was  done  to  soothe  the  feelings  of  the  vanquished.  Accord- 
ingly, it  was  not  difficult  to  bring  about  good  understanding 
again.  In  1872,  after  skilful  arranging,  the  emperors  of 
Russia,  Austria,  and  the  German  Empire  met  in  Berlin, 
where  they  arrived  at  a  cordial  agreement.  No  alliance 
was  concluded,  but  this  League  of  Three  Emperors 
(Dreikaiserbund)  effected  Bismarck's  plan  of  a  new  group 
of  powers  Which  would  include  the  new  German  Empire. 

For  six  years  this  continued,  and  Bismarck  had  little  to 
fear,  with  Italy  friendly,  and  England  holding  aloof.  But 
it  was  soon  evident  that  intimate  connection  with  Austria- 
Hungary  and  Russia  at  the  same  time  was  impossible. 
They  were  rivals  for  the  same  thing,  and  by  1878  could 
no  longer  be  good  friends,  since  they  could  not  each  have 
what  both  of  them  wanted. 

The  Russian  people  had  long  been  extending  westward 


854 


EUROPE,  1789-1920 


Rivalry 
in  the 
Balkans 


The  Con- 
gress of 
Berlin,  1878 


and  southward.  From  the  Turk  they  had  already  taken 
much  land  north  of  the  Black  Sea,  and  now  it  seemed  to 
them  that  ambition  and  destiny  both  called  them  forward 
down  the  western  shore,  to  free  the  Christian  Slavic  peoples 
in  the  Balkan  peninsula,  and  drive  the  Turk  out  of  Con- 
stantinople. But  meanwhile  Austria  was  reviving  her 
ambitions  to  take  Balkan  territory.  In  the  sixteenth  and 
seventeenth  centuries,  when  Ottoman  power  in  Europe 
was  at  its  zenith,  Austria  had  been  the  bulwark  of  Chris- 
tian Europe  against  the  Turk;  it  was  to  her  that  the  sub- 
merged Christian  peoples  to  the  south  looked  for  their 
future  deliverance;  and  she  did  enlarge  her  dominions  by 
southward  expansion  when  the  power  of  the  Turk  began  to 
wane.  After  a  while  her  ambitions  were  turned  in  this 
direction  more  than  ever  before.  Once  she  had  had  great 
influence  in  northern  Europe.  But  the  wars  of  the  French 
Revolution  took  away  her  Austrian  Netherlands,  and  in 
1866  she  was  thrust  out  of  the  community  of  the  German 
peoples.  At  the  same  time  she  had  just  lost  her  hold  on 
the  Italian  peninsula.  Her  ambitions,  however,  quickly 
rose  again.  As  soon  as  the  Austrians  and  the  Hungarians 
reached  agreement,  and  good  relations  began  with  the  new 
German  Empire,  her  hopes  turned  to  new  expansion,  and 
it  seemed  now  that  the  best  chance  for  this  was  down  the 
Adriatic,  perhaps,  through  the  Balkan  peninsula  to  the 
iEgean.  So  it  happened  that  in  this  period  the  ambitions 
of  Russia  and  Austria-Hungary  thwarted  each  other. 
In  1877  a  great  crisis  came,  when  Russia  began  the  Russo- 
Turkish  War,  and  after  a  hard  and  fierce  struggle  shattered 
the  enemy  and  forced  the  signing  of  a  treaty  which  de- 
stroyed the  power  of  Turkey  in  Europe.  Turkey's  sub- 
ject peoples  were  set  free;  and  most  of  the  Ottoman  terri- 
tory in  Europe  was  given  to  a  new  large  Bulgarian  state. 
But  this  treaty  was  not  allowed  to  stand.  Great  Britain 
and  also  Austria-Hungary  let  it  be  known  that  such  a  set- 
tlement was  not  satisfactory.     Therefore  Russia  consented 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 


355 


to  submit  the  treaty  to  a  congress  of  the  powers.  June  13 
such  a  congress  met  at  BerUn.  Bismarck,  who  declared 
that  Germany  had  no  territorial  claims  in  the  Balkans, 
and  that  he  would  be  glad  to  act  as  an  "honest  broker" 
between  the  others,  was  elected  president  the  first  day. 
By  the  Treaty  of  Berlin  which  followed,  Russia  suffered 
a  great  diplomatic  defeat.  What  she  had  done  in  the  Bal- 
kans was  largely  undone;  for  the  Bulgaria  she  proposed  to 
establish  was  greatly  reduced,  while  Austria-Hungary,  who 
had  taken  no  part,  in  defeating  the  Turks,  got  the  right  to 
administer  the  two  Turkish  provinces  of  Bosnia  and  Herze- 
govina, which  lay  contiguous  to  her  and  now  extended  her 
dominion  far  southward.  Great  consequences  followed 
these  decisions  but  one  of  the  first  important  results  was 
the  ending  of  the  close  friendship  which  since  1863  had 
existed  between  Russia  and  Prussia.  Gortchakov,  the 
Russian  chancellor,  who  already  disliked  Bismarck,  be- 
Heved  that  such  humiliation  would  not  have  come  to  his 
country,  had  he  received  any  German  support.  In  1866 
Russia  had  been  friendly  to  Prussia,  and  in  1870  she  had 
even  done  something  to  keep  Austria  from  assisting  France; 
now  in  her  time  of  need  the  German  Empire  had  done 
nothing  for  her;  Bismarck  had  chosen  Austria  rather  than 
Russia.  Perhaps  he  feared  that,  since  Russia  was  opposing 
most  of  the  principal  European  powers,  Germany  in  alli- 
ance with  hfer  would  have  to  oppose  them  also,  and  would 
thus  i)e  made  too  dependent  on  Russia's  good  will. 

For  the  moment  Germany  was  isolated,  and  there  was 
danger  that  Russia  might  seek  alliance  with  either  Austria 
or  France.  But  the  danger  soon  passed.  In  October  1879 
after  brief  negotiations,  an  alliance  was  concluded  between 
the  German  Empire  and  Austria-Hungary.  By  the  terms 
of  this  agreement,  kept  secret  then  but  afterward  pub- 
Hshed,  "the  two  High  Contracting  Parties"  were  bound  to 
stand  by  each  other  with  all  their  armed  forces  if  either  one 
was  attacked  by  Russia;  in  case  either  was  attacked  by 


Alliance 
with 
Austria- 
Hungary, 
1879 


856 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  Triple 
Alliance 


Italy  and 
France 


some  other  power  than  Russia  "the  other  High  Contract- 
ing Party*'  would  observe  "at  least  an  attitude  of  benevo- 
lent neutrality"  toward  the  partner  in  the  treaty;  but  if 
the  power  attacking  was  supported  by  Russia,  then  the 
two  High  Contracting  Parties  would  wage  war  jointly  until 
peace  was  concluded. 

Scarcely  had  this  Dual  Alliance  given  the  security  which 
Bismarck  desired,  when  he  extended  it  to  the  well-known 
Triple  Alliance  which  endured  until  the  Great  War.  This 
was  done  by  drawing  Italy  to  the  two  central  powers. 
The  general  interests  of  Italy  did  not  seem  to  lie  in  such 
company.  Austria-Hungary,  long  Italy's  ruler  and  op- 
pressor, still  held  many  Italians  as  unwilling  subjects. 
The  spirit  of  the  Italian  people  and  the  ties  of  language, 
law,  and  custom,  bound  them  rather  to  France  than  the 
German  Empire.  None  the  less,  there  were  then,  as  there 
were  later  on,  reasons  why  the  Italians  should  feel  hostile 
to  France. 

In  1915  they  joined  France  and  the  Allies  against  Aus- 
tria and  Germany,  and  during  the  course  of  the  war  it 
seemed  to  observers  that  Italy  and  France  were  drawn 
together  by  common  sufferings  and  efforts  as  never  before. 
But  scarcely  was  the  struggle  at  an  end  when  bitter  causes 
of  difference  arose.  Italy  wished  to  have  the  opposite 
coast  of  the  Adriatic  and  become  the  controlling  power 
in  what  had  been  the  Southern  Slavic  dominions  of  the 
Austro-Hungarian  state.  France  hoped  that  upon  the 
ruins  of  the  fallen  Dual  Monarchy  would  rise  new  Slavic 
commonwealths  partly  dependent  on  herself.  Accord- 
ingly, there  was  immediate  conflict  of  ambition  and  de- 
sires. So  it  was  when  Bismarck  sought  to  draw  Italy  into 
his  schemes.  Only  a  few  years  before,  Italy's  unity  had 
been  forwarded  through  the  powerful  assistance  of  France. 
But  Napoleon  III  had  supported  the  Pope  in  maintaining 
his  temporal  power,  and  unification  was  completed  only 
in  1870  when  France  could  no  longer  interfere.     After  the 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE  357 

Franco-Prussian  War  there  was  some  fear  that  French 
intervention  might  restore  to  the  Pope  what  he  had  lost. 
Furthermore,  Italy  was  a  young  and  ambitious  state,  and 
wished  ardently  to  appear  as  one  of  the  greater  powers. 
This  was  beyond  her  resources,  but  it  seemed  then  more 
possible  if  she  were  associated  with  great  companions. 
Finally,  the  direct  motive  was  craftily  supplied  by  Bis- 
marck himself.  In  Algeria,  France  had  already  begun  the 
foundations  of  her  North  African  Empire.  It  was  evident 
that  she  would  be  glad  to  expand  into  the  neighboring  coun- 
try of  Tunis,  but  it  was  also  apparent  that  Italy  had 
high  hopes  of  getting  Tunis  for  herself.  At  the  Congress 
of  Berlin  Bismarck  secretly  encouraged  France  to  take 
Tunis,  wishing  her  to  be  engrossed  in  distant  enterprises, 
and  probably  foreseeing  that  such  action  would  enrage  the 
Italians  and  drive  them  into  Germany's  arms. 

In  1881  France  established  a  protectorate  over  Tunis.     The 
Immediately  there  was  an  outburst  of  indignation  in  Italy,     ^^^^^,?^. 
and  the  statesmen  of  Rome,  falling  in  with  the  schemes     ^382  * 

of  Bismarck,  joined  Germany  and  Austria  in  alliance. 
No  little  gain  came  to  her.  She  was  now  freed  from  dan- 
ger of  Austrian  attack  by  being  associated  with  Austria 
as  an  ally,  and  by  being  in  some  sort  under  German  pro- 
tection. More  and  more  did  she  come  under  German  in- 
fluence, and  in  the  following  years  German  merchants  and 
financiers  almost  got  economic  control  of  the  country.  In 
course  of  time,  however,  as  Italy  grew  stronger  and  less 
afraid  of  Austria-Hungary,  she  hoped  to  get  more  control 
of  the  Adriatic  for  herself.  Thus  she  came  into  conflict 
with  Austria  and  in  the  end  it  was  almost  as  diflicult  for 
Germany  to  reconcile  her  partners  in  the  Triple  Alliance 
as  once  it  had  been  for  Bismarck  to  hold  Austria  and  Rus- 
sia together.  The  Alliance  was  renewed  again  and  again 
each  five  years,  and  it  lasted  long  beyond  Bismarck's  time; 
but  before  the  Great  War  began  Italy  was  not  a  zealous 
member;  and  the  war  broke  the  alliance  to  pieces. 


358 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Effects  of 
the  Alliance 


Further 
ambitions  of 
Bismarck 


Renewed 
understand- 
ing with 
Russia, 
1881-7 


The  Triple  Alliance  was  based  fundamentally  on  the  alli- 
ance between  the  German  Empire  and  Austria-Hungary, 
to  which  now  the  alliance  of  Italy  was  added;  just  as 
afterward  Rumania  and  still  later  Turkey  were  bound 
to  it  also.  It  was  defensive,  but  by  means  of  it  Bismarck 
had  raised  the  German  Empire  to  a  marvellous  pitch  of 
greatness.  It  controlled  all  the  central  part  of  Europe, 
extending  from  the  northern  waters  to  the  Mediterranean, 
separating  eastern  Europe  completely  from  the  west,  and 
thus  occupying  an  impregnable  position.  Within  this 
territory  were  more  than  a  hundred  million  people,  and 
armies  of  two  million  well-trained  soldiers.  It  would 
have  been  the  sheerest  madness  for  any  other  state  to 
come  into  conflict  with  it.  In  this  combination  the  Ger- 
man Empire  was  the  most  powerful  member  and  the  con- 
trolling force.  Accordingly,  after  1882,  Germany  had 
overlordship  or  hegemony  in  Europe,  and  Bismarck  was 
the  most  powerful  man  in  the  world. 

But  high  as  was  now  the  position  of  Germany,  Bismarck 
enhanced  it  still  further.  During  all  the  remaining  years 
of  his  power  he  succeeded  in  keeping  the  other  great 
European  states  from  forming  a  counter  alliance,  and  thus 
kept  France  in  the  lonely  isolation  in  which  he  had  placed 
her;  at  the  same  time  he  tried  to  avoid  misunderstand- 
ing with  Great  Britain,  and  renewed  the  connection  with 
Russia. 

Scarcely  had  the  Alliance  of  1879  been  made  between 
Austria-Hungary  and  Germany  when  Bismarck  tried  to 
draw  Russia  into  another  understanding.  He  had  little 
confidence  at  first  in  the  stability  of  the  alliance  with 
Austria.  He  wished,  moreover,  to  prevent  an  alliance 
between  Russia  and  France.  Therefore,  in  1881  he  suc- 
ceeded in  bringing  about  an  agreement  between  the  three 
emperors  of  Russia,  Austria,  and  the  German  Empire,  that 
if  one  of  these  three  powers  was  at  war  with  a  fourth, 
the  two  other  parties  would  preserve  a  "benevolent  neu- 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 


359 


trality."  This  stipulation  was  also  to  apply  in  case  of  a 
war  between  one  of  the  three  parties  and  Turkey,  in  ease 
an  imderstanding  about  such  a  war  had  already  been 
reached  between  the  parties.  The  a^eement  made  spec- 
ial allowance  for  the  alliance  between  Austria-Hungary  and 
Germany,  and  was  thus  more  advantageous  to  Germany 
than  to  Russia.  None  the  less  in  1884  it  was  renewed 
with  slight  modification.  Three  years  later,  however,  this 
was  not  done,  for  Austria  had  been  steadily  acquiring  a 
more  dominating  influence  in  the  Balkans,  therefore^ 
Russia  was  ngt  willing  to  renew  the  agreement  of  1881,  but 
sought  instead  an  alliance  or  agreement  with  Germany 
alone.  Bismarck  let  it  be  understood  that  the  alliance 
with  Austria  must  stand.  But  the  two  signed  an  agree- 
ment nevertheless.  It  provided  that  if  one  of  the  two 
contracting  parties  was  at  war  with  a  third  power,  the 
other  contracting  party  should  maintain  benevolent 
neutrality,  though  this  provision  was  not  to  apply  in  case 
of  an  attack  made  by  one  of  the  contracting  powers  on 
Austria  or  France,  thus  preserving  the  alliance  with  Aus- 
tria, and  safeguarding  Russia's  relations  with  France. 
Other  articles  provided  that  Germany  should  recognize 
Russia's  rights  in  the  Balkan  peninsula  and  assist  her  in 
maintaining  them  there.  This  agreement  has  been  known 
as  the  "Reinsurance  Treaty."  In  1879  Bismarck  had  in- 
sured Germany  against  attack  by  Russia.  Now  he  got, 
as  it  were,  insurance  from  the  other  side,  for  by  this  very 
secret  "agreement"  he  provided  that  France  would 
not  be  supported  by  Russia  if  she  attacked  the  German 
Empire. 

Seldom  has  there  been  diplomacy  more  astute.  Bis- 
marck succeeded  in  keeping  all  he  had  won.  Since  1871 
not  once  had  France  been  able  to  make  alliance  with  some 
other  European  power  so  as  to  dare  to  begin  war  on  her 
foe;  while  Germany  was  seldom  without  close  friends, 
and  usually  the  center  of  a  powerful  alliance.    But  in  spite 


The   "Rein- 
Burance 
Treaty," 
1887 


Bismarck's 

great 

success 


860 


EUROPE,   1789-1020 


The  new 
generation 


The  passing 
of  Bismarck 


of  his  vast  success  the  time  of  the  chancellor  was  nearing 
its  end.  His  era  was  passing;  other  men  and  other  meas- 
ures were  appearing.  By  1887  he  was  still  a  mighty  figure, 
but  a  new  generation  was  coming  forward  with  ideals  which 
he  had  never  cherished,  which,  indeed,  he  could  scarce 
understand. 

It  had  been  his  purpose  to  unite  the  German  states,  then 
make  Germany  the  greatest  European  power.  These 
tasks  filled  his  mind  and  the  world  of  diplomacy  which  he 
knew.  But  meanwhile  Great  Britain  had  been  acquiring 
an  ever  larger  colonial  empire,  and  France  had  gone  be- 
yond the  seas  and  won  for  herself  new  possessions.  None 
of  this  had  appealed  to  Bismarck.  But  all  around  him 
were  growing  up  young  Germans  who  saw  a  new  world 
which  could  not  be  clear  to  his  eyes.  They  would  try  to 
make  Germany  a  great  naval  power,  which  would  bring 
her  into  conflict  with  Britain,  have  Germany  get  colonies 
and  markets  all  over  the  world,  and  join  Austria  in  pushing 
forward  in  the  Balkans. 

During  the  lifetime  of  his  master,  the  emperor  whom  he 
had  made,  his  power  continued  unshaken,  but  after  1888 
came  marked  change.  The  new  ruler  embodied  new 
ideas  and  the  new  ambitions  which  were  to  carry  Germany 
on  so  much  further  and  at  last  bring  her  down  to  destruc- 
tion. He  regarded  Bismarck  with  respect,  but  gave  him 
none  of  the  affectionate  confidence  so  long  bestowed  by 
William  I.  Bismarck  soon  found  the  management  of 
affairs  no  longer  entirely  in  his  hands,  while  the  young 
emperor,  himself  full  of  vigor  and  spirit,  grew  more  and 
more  impatient  at  the  domination  of  one  who  had  so  long 
been  first  in  Europe  that  he  was  unable  to  take  second 
place.  For  more  than  a  year  relations  between  the  two 
grew  more  strained.  The  actual  government  of  the  em- 
pire was  in  the  hands  of  Bismarck,  who  had  under  him,  in 
important  places,  members  of  his  own  family  or  friends 
he  had  raised  up  to  obey  him.     But  the  new  emperor  pres- 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 


361 


ently  insisted  that  his  ideas  be  followed.  In  1890,  Bis- 
marck resigned  after  being  told  he  was  in  the  way.  It 
seemed  strange  to  the  older  generation  that  this  could  take 
place;  as  a  famous  cartoon  in  Punch  declared,  to  them  it 
was  "Dropping  the  Pilot." 

Of  Bismarck's  work  it  was  long  difficult  to  give  proper 
estimate.  So  gigantic  had  been  his  success  that  for  some 
time  it  seemed  he  was  the  greatest  statesman  for  genera- 
tions. His  accomplishment  had  been  vast,  and  his  success 
seemed  so  complete  as  to  justify  almost  all  he  had  done. 
He  found  Prussia  second  among  the  German  states,  and 
the  German  people  divided.  In  a  brief  span  of  years 
he  had  made  Prussia  the  greatest  state  on  the  continent, 
defeated  every  one  of  her  rivals,  achieved  the  unification 
of  Germany,  and  made  his  country  the  center  and  founda- 
tion thereof.  Then  he  had  kept  the  new  empire  safe  in 
its  exalted  position,  surrounded  by  friends,  head  and 
leader  of  the  strongest  alliance  in  the  world.  Justly  he  was 
regarded  as  the  father  and  founder  of  his  country. 

And  yet,  there  was  another  side  of  it  all,  which  would 
be  more  apparent  in  the  future.  The  unification  of  Ger- 
many had  not  been  brought  about  through  liberal  develop- 
ment and  respect  for  the  rights  of  others,  but  partly  by 
force,  chicane,  and  fraud,  by  contempt  for  the  rights 
of  people,  and  cynical  disregard  of  obligations  and  honor. 
All  of  this  seemed  good  to  Germans  who  saw  it  through 
the  glamor  of  success,  and  a  generation  of  Germans  was 
about  to  grow  up  which  would  admire  above  all  things  the 
force  and  the  lack  of  scruple  which  Bismarck  had  employed 
and  so  brilliantly  taught.  The  leaders  of  Germany  in  the 
early  part  of  the  twentieth  century,  who  had  learned  in 
the  school  of  Bismarck  as  he  had  learned  from  that  of 
Frederick  the  Great,  would  worship  force  and  strength, 
just  as  he  had  once  discarded  all  policy  but  the  rule  of 
"blood  and  iron;"  and  as  he  had  altered  the  Ems  dis- 
patch, so  would  they  tear  up  the  treaty  about  Belgian 


Greatness  of 

Bismarck's 

work 


EvU 
conse- 
quences 
thereof 


862 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


HiUtarism 
and    French 
resentment 


The  new. 
era 


neutrality  as  a  mere  worthless  "scrap  of  paper."  This 
would  array  the  world  against  them,  and  the  empire,  over- 
whelmed in  defeat,  would  at  last  lie  prostrate  and  dis- 
membered. 

Since  his  work  was  effected  and  maintained  by  military 
power,  in  another  generation  all  the  great  states  of  Europe 
had  striven  to  make  themselves  strong  military  powers  on 
the  Prussian  model;  by  the  end  of  the  century  Europe  was 
groaning  under  intolerable  military  burdens;  and  a  few 
years  after  was  divided  into  two  great  military  camps. 
His  treatment  of  France  the  French  never  forgave,  and 
thereafter  the  empire  was  encumbered  with  the  mortgage 
of  the  hatred  of  the  French,  who  might  despair  of  being 
able  to  take  vengeance,  but  whose  hatred  nevertheless 
lived  on.  Bismarck  does  not  seem  to  have  looked  into  the 
future,  beyond  his  own  age.  He  scarcely  realized  the 
importance  of  a  colonial  empire,  nor  did  he  conceive  how 
soon  a  great  deal  of  German  ambition  would  go  beyond 
Europe,  to  the  oceans  and  to  lands  far  away.  It  would 
have  been  better  in  all  respects,  some  have  thought,  had 
he  not  taken  from  France  territory  in  Europe,  but  taken 
of  her  colonies  instead.  So  it  was  that  some  years  before 
the  Great  War  an  author  wrote,  without  being  much 
heeded,  that  it  was  still  too  soon  to  know  whether  the 
chancellor's  policy  was  successful. 

With  the  passing  of  Bismarck  began  the  second  stage  in 
the  development  of  the  new  German  nation.  Between 
1864  and  1888  the  empire  had  been  created  and  made  the 
greatest  of  the  European  powers.  From  about  1890  on 
to  1914  it  went  forward  to  greater  things;  and  at  last  its 
leaders  strove  to  make  it  beyond  doubt  the  greatest  power 
in  the  world.  The  outlook  of  German  leaders  became 
wider,  their  ambition  vaster  and  grander,  they  played  for 
great  stakes  higher  and  more  boldly,  until  in  the  end,  as 
one  of  them  said,  they  sought  "World  Dominion  or  Down- 
fall" 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 


363 


It  was  feared  at  first  that  the  young  emperor  was  rash 
and  might  easily  plunge  into  a  war,  for  he  spoke  with  stem 
pride  of  his  army.  But  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  cen- 
tury in  his  reign  there  was  no  great  conflict  in  Europe, 
and  often  he  boasted  that  he  had  striven  to  keep  peace. 
Doubtless  he  had.  This  desire  for  peace,  however,  seems 
always  to  have  been  on  condition  that  Germany  keep  her 
superiority  in  Europe,  and  that  her  policy  should  not  be 
thwarted.  When  there  rose  up  against  the  alliance  headed 
by  Germany  another  great  group  of  powers  and  it  was  no 
longer  so  easy  for  Germany's  word  to  be  law,  one  great 
crisis  followed  another  in  Europe  for  the  space  of  ten  years, 
after  which  time  the  nations  were  plunged  into  the  greatest 
of  all  their  wars. 

When  in  1890  William  II  took  control  of  the  govern- 
ment and  its  foreign  policy,  there  followed  at  once  a  great 
altering  of  political  relations.  Bismarck  had  kept  France 
isolated ;  as  she  now  became  partner  in  a  great  alliance.  He 
had  tried  by  all  means  to  retain  Russia's  friendship,  and 
he  had  succeeded  almost  all  of  the  time.  But  Russia  was 
allowed  to  draw  away  now,  and  she  became  the  ally  of 
France.  Bismarck  had  desired  not  to  antagonize  Great 
Britain,  and  during  his  time  no  dangerous  misunderstand- 
ing had  arisen,  but  in  less  than  ten  years  Germany  entered 
upon  a  policy  which  profoundly  alarmed  England,  and 
shortly  caused  her  to  stand  beside  Russia  and  France. 

The  secret  agreement  between  Russia  and  Germany  in 
1887  had  been  made  for  three  years.  In  1890,  the  Tsar 
tried  to  have  it  renewed,  but  Germany  would  not  consent. 
A  great  deal  relating  to  all  this  is  not  known  yet,  but 
it  has  been  conjectured  that  one  of  the  important  causes  of 
disagreement  between  Bismarck  and  William  II  concerned 
the  relations  with  Russia:  that  Bismarck  would  have  had 
the  understanding  renewed;  that  the  young  emperor  now 
had  other  plans  which  ran  counter  to  continuing  this 
friendship;  that  this  was  the  time  when  the  German  gov- 


Policy  of 
WiUiam  n 


Diplomatic 
revolution 


End  of 
the  "Rein- 
surance" 


364 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Germany 

and 

England 


Germany 
and  Turkey 


Extension 
to    the    east 
and  the 
south 


eminent  began  to  cherish  ambitions  in  the  Balkans  and 
Turkey.  "My  foreign  policy  remains  and  will  remain  the 
same  as  it  was  in  the  time  of  my  grandfather,"  was  the 
message  William  sent  to  the  Tsar.  But  the  Russian  am- 
bassador believed  that  Germany  in  the  future  would  have 
greater  regard  than  ever  for  the  alliance  with  Austria- 
Hungary. 

It  also  seemed  to  the  Russian  ambassador,  who  wrote  of 
these  changes,  that  Germany  now  counted  on  getting  the 
friendship  of  Great  Britain  to  replace  that  of  Russia,  and 
even  that  Great  Britain  might  be  added  to  the  Triple 
Alliance.  Friendly  relations  with  England  were  a  tradi- 
tion; the  mother  of  the  German  Emperor  was  a  daughter  of 
Queen  Victoria,  whose  husband,  Albert,  had  been  a  Ger- 
man; there  were  many  people  in  England  at  this  time  who 
learned  from  the  school  of  Freeman  and  Carlyle  how  ex- 
cellent were  German  things,  and  how  much  that  was  good 
in  England  had  been  inherited  from  Germany  of  old;  while 
Lord  Salisbury,  prime  minister,  believed  strongly  in  best 
possible  relations  with  the  German  Empire.  Good  rela- 
tions with  Britain  were,  accordingly,  easy  to  maintain  for 
the  present,  though  England  would  almost  certainly  not 
have  entered  into  any  alliance. 

The  attention  of  men  was  still  fastened  mostly  on  older 
issues,  the  feeling  between  France  and  Germany,  the  riv- 
alry between  England  and  France,  and  between  England 
and  Russia.  But  a  very  significant  event  occurred  the  year 
before  Bismarck  retired.  In  1889  William  II  went  to  Con- 
stantinople and  visited  Abdul  Hamid,  the  Sultan  of  Tur- 
key. As  men  afterward  saw  this  event  it  seemed  the 
beginning  of  an  epoch  in  the  politics  of  Europe. 

In  the  Middle  Ages  the  German  people  had  fought 
against  the  Slavs  to  the  east,  subduing  or  pressing  them 
back,  extending  their  German  dominion.  In  the  course 
of  this  movement  to  the  east  and  the  south  some  Germans 
had  pushed  beyond  the  mass  of  their  fellows  and  made 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE  365 

isolated  settlements,  which  in  the  nineteenth  century  were 
still  flourishing  in  Hungary,  and  in  Poland,  in  the  western 
and  southern  parts  of  Russia,  and  even  as  far  off  as  the 
Balkans.  For  a  long  while  some  Germans  had  dreamed  of 
a  day  when  these  detached  groups,  and  the  aliens  sur- 
rounding, might  be  incorporated  in  a  greater  German 
Empire.  Heinrich  Heine  prophesied  that  Germans  would 
some  day  possess  lands  as  far  off  as  the  Ukraine;  and  in 
the  earlier  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  other  Germans 
advised  colonization  in  the  valley  of  the  Danube  and  be- 
yond, saying  that  here  was  the  best  of  fields  for  German 
expansion.  After  the  Franco-Prussian  War  colonization 
of  Asia  Minor  and  Mesopotamia  was  suggested,  in  the 
dominions  of  the  Sultan  of  Turkey.  About  1880  a 
certain  one  urged  his  fellows  not  to  emigrate  to  America: 
"We  must  create  a  Central  Europe  by  conquering  for 
German  colonization  large  spaces  to  the  east  of  our  fron- 
tiers." 

Now  in  the  generation  which  followed  that  of  Bismarck  Drang  nach 
such  thoughts  constantly  gained  greater  importance,  until  Osten 
gradually  the  idea  of  Drang  nach  Osten  or  pressure  by 
Germans  to  the  east,  came  to  be  the  underlying  motive 
in  German  foreign  affairs,  and  at  last  principal  among  the 
causes  leading  to  the  Great  European  War.  William  II 
was  now  seeking  the  friendship  of  Turkey.  England  had 
previously  been  friend  and  protector  of  the  Turks,  but 
events  like  the  British  occupation  of  Egypt  had  caused  her 
influence  to  wane.  In  1898  William  went  to  Constanti- 
nople again,  and,  going  on  to  Jerusalem  and  Damascus, 
proclaimed  himself  the  protector  of  Turkey  and  an- 
noimced  that  he  was  the  friend  of  Mohammedans  all  over 
the  world.  Year  after  year  German  representatives  es- 
tablished the  influence  of  their  country  more  strongly. 
Most  people  had  no  conception  how  far  they  were  succeed- 
ing, but  in  1914  it  was  suddenly  found  that  Turkey  was 
more  closely  bound  to  Germany  and  Austria  than  was 


866 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  Bagdad 
lUilway 


Importance 
of  the 
Bagdad 
Railway 


Italy,  and  that  she  was  actually  a  vassal  of  the  German 
Empire. 

As  early  as  1875  German  engineers  had  built  for  the 
Turkish  government  a  railway  across  Anatolia,  connecting 
Konia  with  Skutari,  opposite  Constantinople.  Thirteen 
years  later  this  railway  was  transferred  to  a  German  com- 
pany. In  1899,  the  year  after  the  Emperor's  second  visit, 
the  Sultan  granted  him  a  concession  to  extend  this  railroad 
across  Asiatic  Turkey  down  to  the  Persian  Gulf.  At  the 
head  of  the  Gulf,  and  controlling  the  outlet  to  its  waters, 
was  the  district  of  Koweit,  ruled  by  a  sheik  who  gave  little 
obedience  to  the  Sultan.  With  this  sheik  the  British  made 
a  treaty,  so  as  to  block  the  future  completion  of  the  rail- 
road, which  they  conceived  might  be  dangerous  to  them. 
None  the  less,  work  was  taken  up  and  continued  at  inter- 
vals until,  just  before  1914,  the  road  had  been  taken  al- 
most completely  through  to  Bagdad  and  the  control  and 
development  of  Asiatic  Turkey  had  been  put  into  German 
hands. 

If  the  road  were  ever  completed  and  Germany  got  con- 
trol of  the  intervening  territory  in  Europe,  she  would  be 
mistress  of  the  most  important  line  of  communication  in 
the  world.  It  was  in  Europe  and  in  Asia  that  most  of  the 
world's  inhabitants  lived.  Communication  between  them 
had  hitherto  been  mostly  by  water.  Of  the  water  routes 
there  were  two.  The  long  one  ran  down  to  the  south  of 
Africa  then  up  toward  India  and  China;  for  some  time 
it  had  been  dominated  by  the  British,  who  Jield  India  and 
South  Africa,  and  numerous  stations  on  the  way.  The 
better  and  the  shorter  route  was  through  the  Mediterra- 
nean Sea;  and  this  also  was  even  more  securely  in  the  hands 
of  the  British,  who  held  Gibraltar  and  the  Suez  Canal. 
But  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century  was  an  era  of  rail- 
road development,  which  furnished  transportation  swifter 
and  easier  than  any  by  water.  If  the  Germans  controlled 
railroad  lines  leading  down  from  their  own  northern  ports 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE  367 

across  Austria-Hungary  and  the  Balkans  to  Constanti- 
nople, and  connected  them  with  the  Bagdad  Railway  hav- 
ing a  terminus  on  the  Persian  Gulf,  then  Germany  would 
control  the  shortest  and  the  best  route  between  Europe 
and  Asia,  and  might  in  time  get  control  of  a  great  part  of 
all  the  world's  trade.  Even  more  important  were  the 
strategic  advantages  involved.  Not  only  would  the  Ger- 
mans and  their  friends,  lying  between  their  possible  ene- 
mies, separate  them  and  have  them  at  a  disadvantage, 
but  they  would  have  incomparably  the  best  line  of  interior 
communications  for  moving  troops  swiftly,  a  route  more- 
over capable  of  being  rendered  invulnerable  to  attacks  by 
sea-power.  Some  Germans  boasted  that  a  branch  of  this 
railway  system  would  lead  down  near  to  Egypt  and  always 
be  a  threat  to  British  power  there,  while  on  the  Persian 
Gulf  they  could  at  any  time  put  masses  of  troops,  to  strike 
over  at  India,  more  quickly  than  the  British  could  ever  bring 
reinforcements.  In  short  they  would  have  an  instrument 
for  making  Germany  the  greatest  power  in  the  world. 

Because  of  this  policy  the  politics  of  continental  Europe     Austria- 
were  altered  completely.     Russia,  first  dropped  from  close     Hungary 
friendship  by  Germany,  then  antagonized  by  German  pol-     ^^  *^® 
icy  in  Turkey  and  in  the  Balkans,  had  entered  into  the     Empire 
Dual  Alliance  with  France,  opposing  not  only  Austria- 
Hungary  but  Germany  as  well.     And  gradually  the  Triple 
Alliance  changed.     So  far  as  Italy  was  concerned  it  was 
evident  that  no  strong  tie  remained.     Very  different  was 
it  with  Austria-Hungary.     When  the  alliance  with  Ger- 
many was  made  in  1879  Bismarck  believed  that  the  con- 
nection might  not  endure.     Nevertheless,  during  his  time 
it  grew  stronger;  and  now,  with  the  development  of  the 
new  German  policy,  connection  with  Austria  became  firmer 
each  year,  since  that  connection  was  indispensable  to  the 
success  of  the  German  schemes.     The  empire  planned  in 
Middle  Europe  and  nearer  Asia  had  at  one  of  its  ends 
Asiatic  Turkey  and  at  the  other  the  great  German  state; 


368 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Rivalry  of 
Germany 
and 
England 


Earlier 
relations 


but  the  scheme  could  never  be  fulfilled  unless  Austria- 
Hungary  and  the  Balkans,  which  lay  in  between,  were  kept 
in  close  alliance  or  controlled.  Therefore,  firm  alliance 
with  the  Dual  Monarchy  came  to  be  the  very  corner-stone 
of  German  foreign  policy.  It  was  more  and  more  evident 
that  Germany  would  never  fail  to  give  Austria  support. 
And  the  attachment  of  Austria-Hungary  to  the  German 
Empire  became  equally  strong.  Not  only  did  she  require 
the  support  of  her  powerful  neighbor  against  Russia,  but 
the  ambitions  of  Austria  coincided  largely  with  German 
plans,  for  she  wished  to  be  the  greatest  power  in  the  west- 
ern Balkans,  rule  all  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Adriatic, 
and,  perhaps,  extend  her  control  down  to  the  Mediterra- 
nean at  Salonica. 

Meanwhile  another  change  in  international  affairs 
brought  another  vast  alteration.  So  immense  was  the 
development  of  the  German  Empire,  so  colossal  her 
strength  as  she  grew,  that  her  ambitions  developed  in 
every  direction — not  only  in  eastern  and  central  Europe, 
in  sharper  rivalry  with  Russia,  but  also  on  the  seas  and  in 
distant  places,  with  England  and  the  British  Empire. 
As  this  came  about,  it  was  very  evident  that  two  of  Bis- 
marck's axioms  had  been  discarded.  He  had  always 
striven  to  keep  Russia  as  a  friend  and  avoid  any  estrange- 
ment with  Britain;  but  the  Germany  of  William  II  hesi- 
tated not  to  challenge  and  contend  with  them  both. 

Between  Englishmen  and  Germans  there  had  long  been 
friendship  with  Httle  memory  of  wars  or  old  wrong,  and 
there  was  often  a  certain  feehng  of  kinship  because  of 
blood  and  common  inheritance  and  speech.  Spain, 
France,  and  Russia  had  been  the  rivals  of  England,  not  the 
Germans.  Englishmen  viewed  the  establishment  of  Ger- 
man imity  with  sympathy  and  admiration.  For  some 
time  after  1871  the  interests  of  Britain  and  the  German 
Empire  did  not  conflict.  Great  Britain  was  a  sea  power 
and  her  chief  interests  were  outside  of  Europe;  Germany 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 


369 


was  not  a  naval  power  during  Bismarck's  time,  and  her 
interest  was  altogether  in  keeping  what  she  had  just 
achieved:  first  place  in  Continental  affairs.  Presently,  the 
immense  maritime  and  industrial  development  of  Germany- 
brought  keen  competition  and  aroused  some  unpleasant 
feeling.  But  all  this  awakened  no  hostility  in  Britain, 
and  as  time  went  on  it  was  seen  that  England  could  well 
hold  her  own. 

The  great  change  came  with  the  new  school  of  German 
statesmen,  who  looked  beyond  Europe  and  would  make 
Germany  the  greatest  of  the  great.  The  German  army 
was  incomparably  the  strongest  in  the  world,  but  they 
began  to  cherish  the  plan  of  making  Germany  a  great 
naval  power  and  a  seeker  for  colonies  also.  Hitherto 
Britain  had  been  on  her  guard  against  France  and  Russia, 
both  of  them  strong  naval  powers  and  active  rivals  in 
Africa  or  Asia.  For  some  years  it  had  been  her  purpose 
to  maintain  the  "two-power  standard,"  or  keep  her  fleet 
stronger  than  the  two  next  greatest  navies  combined,  and 
in  1889  she  had  undertaken  a  comprehensive  scheme  of 
naval  increase.  Britain  had  no  large  army,  and  so  could 
not  defend  herself  against  the  great  standing  armies  of 
European  states  if  ever  they  could  invade  her.  Her  sole 
reliance  was  on  command  of  the  sea,  and  it  was  justly  felt 
that  if  this  were  ever  lost,  then  all  would  be  gone  beyond 
hope.  The  British  people  accordingly  were  resolved  at 
all  costs  to  maintain  their  superiority  on  the  ocean,  and 
would  probably  come  to  regard  with  much  dread  any  na- 
tion which  challenged  their  sea  power. 

Suddenly  and  in  dramatic  way  the  German  government 
did  do  this.  Germans  were  building  up  a  great  commerce, 
which  was  not  interfered  with  by  Britain,  but  which  they 
knew  could  be  stopped  or  destroyed  by  British  sea-power. 
They  desired  colonies  and  markets  abroad,  and  they  felt 
that  they  had  better  chance  of  being  considered  in  distant 
places  if  they  had  a  great  war  fleet  of  their  own.     They 


Rivalry 
on  the  sea 


Gennan 
ambition 
the  sea 


on 


r. 


370 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The    Naval 
Laws  of 
1898  and 
1900 


Effects  of 
German 
naval 
increase 


England 
seeks    new 
friends 


considered  that  the  British  Empire,  as  well  as  the  new 
French  colonial  empire,  had  been  made  possible  by  naval 
power,  and  the  leaders  felt  that  Germany  was  incomplete 
so  long  as  she  had  no  strong  navy. 

The  lead  was  taken  by  Admiral  von  Tirpitz  and  the 
emperor  himself.  There  was  opposition  among  the  older 
school  of  thinkers  in  Germany,  but  after  much  effort  a 
law  was  passed  by  the  Reichstag  in  1898  providing  for 
a  great  naval  increase.  This  law  provided  for  expending, 
during  a  course  of  years,  1,000,000,000  marks,  and  was 
considered  to  be  the  most  ambitious  naval  program  under- 
taken by  any  state  in  the  memory  of  man.  That  same 
year  the  Flottenverein  (Navy  League)  was  established. 
A  vast  amount  of  educational  work  and  propaganda  was 
done  by  this  organization,  and  it  was  most  successful  in 
arousing  the  German  people.  In  1900  a  vaster  sum  was 
appropriated,  and  plans  made  for  a  navy  twice  as  powerful 
as  that  provided  two  years  before. 

Such  startling  naval  increase  affected  other  powers  at 
once  and  profoundly.  But  of  all  Germany's  neighbors 
none  saw  herself  threatened  so  greatly  as  England.  As 
this  new  German  navy  was  built  up  Great  Britain  would 
be  threatened,  perhaps,  by  the  German  Empire  more  than 
by  France.  The  very  preamble  of  the  law  of  1900  seemed 
directed  against  England.  "  Germany  must  have  a  battle 
fleet  so  strong  that  even  for  an  adversary  with  the  greatest 
sea  power  a  war  against  her  would  .  .  .  imperil  his  own 
position  in  the  world."  "The  ocean  is  indispensable  to 
the  greatness  of  Germany,"  said  the  emperor  about  this 
time.     And  in  1901 :     "Our  future  lies  upon  the  water." 

There  was  indeed  a  great  turning  point  about  1898.  In 
that  year  occurred  the  crisis  between  Britain  and  France, 
in  which  the  French  yielded,  but  remained  filled  with 
hatred  and  anger.  On  the  other  hand  Germany  was  still 
well  liked  in  Great  Britain.  But  during  the  Boer  War, 
which  began  in  1899,  Germans  gave  to  the  Boers  such 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE  371 

sympathy  and  encouragement  as  they  could,  and  might 
perhaps  have  intervened  if  England  had  not  controlled  the 
sea.  Next  year  when  German  naval  plans  were  so  greatly 
enlarged,  Englishmen  pondered  upon  the  situation.  It  was 
difficult  for  most  of  them  to  conceive  that  Britain  could 
be  in  any  danger,  for  British  supremacy  on  the  seas  was  a 
tradition,  and  British  control  had  been  unquestioned  since 
the  day  of  Trafalgar.  None  the  less  a  new  generation 
was  coming  into  public  life  which  believed  that  recently 
Germany  had  increased  much  more  greatly  than  England; 
that  this  greater  Germany  now  bade  fair  to  be  so  powerful 
on  the  sea  that  Britain  was  no  longer  safe,  as  before,  aloof 
in  her  "splendid  isolation";  that  she  could  no  longer  wisely 
stand  alone;  and  that  she  should  enter  into  closer  relations 
with  friends  in  Europe  and  everywhere  else  in  the  world. 
Apparently  the  leader  of  this  group  in  England  was  King 
Edward  VII,  who  came  to  the  throne  in  1901.  He  had 
sincere  admiration  for  France,  and  he  took  the  lead  in 
seeking  her  friendship.  In  1904  England  and  France  set- 
tled all  their  differences,  and  entered  into  the  Entente 
Cordiale  friendly  understanding.  Three  years  later,  under 
what  seemed  increasing  menace  of  German  naval  expan- 
sion, Britain  and  Russia  settled  their  differences  also. 
Accordingly,  by  1907  the  new  naval  policy  of  Germany  had 
brought  England  out  of  her  long  aloofness  from  European 
affairs  into  close  and  friendly  relations  with  France,  and 
cordial  relations  with  Russia. 

The  statesmen  of  Britain  settled  outstanding  differences.  Her 
not  only  with  France  and  with  Russia,  but  with  Italy  and  supremacy 
the  United  States,  and  they  had  already  made  alliance  with 
Japan.  British  naval  forces,  once  scattered  all  over  the 
world,  were  silently  drawn  in  and  concentrated  in  the  wa- 
ters about  Britain  and  Ireland.  But  the  uneasiness  was 
felt  rather  for  the  future  than  for  the  immediate  present, 
because  it  was  believed  that  for  a  long  while  Germany's 
utmost  efforts  could  not  really  challenge  the  British  navy. 


on  the  sea 


372 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

Dread- 
naught 


An  English- 


Home 


A  great  change  presently  occurred.  In  1904-5,  during 
the  Russo-Japanese  War,  modern  warships  were  really 
tested  for  the  first  time;  and  many  lessons  were  learned 
then.  After  the  great  battle  of  Tsushima  it  was  seen,  as 
some  experts  had  before  pointed  out,  that  high  speed,  which 
would  enable  a  warship  to  take  such  position  as  it  wished, 
heavy  armor,  and  great  guns  of  long  range,  conferred  im- 
mense superiority.  But  these  principles  could  only  be 
applied  at  their  best  on  a  ship  of  very  great  size.  In  1907 
the  British  launched  the  Dreadnaught,  a  battleship  which 
was  the  largest,  the  swiftest,  and  most  heavily  armored 
warship  that  had  ever  been  put  afloat,  and  it  had  also  the 
largest  number  of  giant  guns  of  long  range.  This  monster, 
it  was  believed,  would  be  invulnerable  to  the  attacks  of 
ordinary  warships,  able  to  overtake  or  outrange  an  an- 
tagonist, always  able  to  choose  its  own  range,  and  beyond 
the  enemy's  range  batter  the  enemy  to  pieces.  For  a  mo- 
ment Britain  seemed  to  have  got  great  superiority  over  all 
other  rivals,  but  it  was  she  who  had  the  greatest  number 
of  the  older  vessels,  and  it  was  possession  of  them  which 
gave  her  such  lead  over  the  German  navy.  Germany, 
with  her  new  naval  program,  was  building  the  greatest 
number  of  new  ships,  and  immediately  she  altered  the 
plans  and  began  making  new  vessels  of  the  Dreadnaught 
type.  It  was  evident  to  the  thinking  that  all  unexpectedly 
she  had  a  chance  to  overcome  England's  naval  preponder- 
ance and  threaten  her  command  of  the  seas. 

Most  of  the  English  people  did  not  quickly  understand 
the  great  changes  occurring,  or  the  altered  position  of 
affairs.  But  in  1909  appeared  the  play.  An  Englishman's 
Home,  It  portrayed  a  nation  so  ignorant  as  to  be  without 
fear,  when  it  was  really  without  means  of  defence.  It  told 
of  England  suddenly  invaded,  unable  to  resist.  It  stirred 
the  English  people  to  their  depths,  and  aroused  them  at 
last  more  than  the  warnings  of  statesmen  and  writers. 
There  was  profound  alarm  and  depression,  during  what 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 


373 


was  known  as  the  Naval  Panic  of  1909.  Some  Englishmen 
felt  hopeless,  some  wanted  a  great  army,  but  most  cried 
for  huge  naval  increase,  and  this  was  swiftly  undertaken. 
Eight  great  battleships  were  proposed  for  that  year,  and 
actually  construction  was  so  rapidly  advanced  that  Britain 
after  a  short  time  of  anxiety  found  herself,  not  indeed  with 
a  fleet  greater  than  the  two  next  most  powerful  navies,  but 
with  one  considerably  stronger  than  the  battle  fleet  of  the 
German  Empire. 

Many  people  in  both  countries  declared  there  was  no 
reason  for  conflict  between  the  two  nations,  and  sincerely 
deplored  the  growing  suspicion  and  ill-will,  but  uneasiness 
and  anger  increased.  In  both  countries  newspapers  and 
periodicals  did  not  cease  to  point  out  how  the  foe  threat- 
ened vital  interests,  and  that  preparations  must  be  hast- 
ened so  as  to  be  ready  for  inevitable  conflict.  In  England 
men  recalled  what  had  once  been  done  to  France.  In 
Germany  the  Flottenverein  taught  that  England  had  ever 
been  the  enemy  in  Germany's  way,  and  that  real  greatness 
could  come  only  after  another  war  of  liberation.  Some 
Germans  believed  that  the  British  might  try  to  destroy 
their  fleet.  Some  Englishmen  feared  that  Germans  might 
suddenly  try  to  dash  across  into  England,  and,  once  there, 
annihilate  their  empire. 

Thus  the  force  of  events  ranged  Great  Britain  ever 
more  closely  with  Germany's  opponents.  It  may  be  that 
most  people  in  both  countries  abhorred  the  thought  of  war 
between  them.  Englishmen  felt  that  their  preparations 
were  merely  defensive.  But  the  great  danger  in  the  situa- 
tion arose  from  the  very  fact  that  conflict  seemed  inevita- 
ble to  so  many.  Englishmen  often  believed  that  the 
ambitions  of  the  German  Empire  could  only  be  fulfilled  by 
sweeping  the  British  Empire  away,  and  taking  the  best 
parts  for  a  greater  Germany;  many  Germans  were  taught 
that  while  England  ruled  the  seas  Germany  could  develop 
only  on  sufferance.     More  and  more  were  Germans  told 


Increasing 
suspicion 


Drifting 

toward 

danger 


874 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Efforts    for 
an  under- 
standing 


Lord 

Haldane's 

mission 


that  England  had  joined  their  enemies  in  an  Einkreisung, 
an  effort  to  encircle  and  crush  them.  Year  by  year  it 
came  to  be  better  understood  that  Englishmen  must  not 
make  again  the  mistake  of  1870,  not  again  allow  France 
to  be  crushed,  for  then  afterward  they  might  have  to  fight 
alone  against  Germany  in  a  hopeless  struggle. 

Before  the  last  evil  days  of  July  1914  there  was  some 
effort  to  clear  away  the  hostility  and  suspicion.  Germans 
often  said  they  desired  the  friendship  of  England,  and  that 
the  two  powers  working  together  could  ensure  the  peace 
of  the  world.  Many  Englishmen  wished  that  a  friendly 
understanding  could  be  reached,  and  would  have  given 
much  to  win  the  true  friendship  of  the  German  people. 
They  were  not,  however,  willing  to  let  their  naval  super- 
iority be  impaired.  A  British  statesman  speaking  in  1912 
declared  that  naval  power  was  a  necessity  to  Englishmen, 
but  not  to  Germans:  to  them  it  meant  expansion,  to  Eng- 
land existence.  Already  in  1907,  at  the  Second  Hague 
Conference,  England  had  proposed  limitation  of  arma- 
ments, but  Germany  refused.  Indeed,  Germans  boasted 
that  they  could  keep  up  the  race,  while  England  must 
presently  fall  behind.  English  leaders  announced  that 
their  naval  construction  would  be  regulated  by  whatever 
Germany  did.  They  were  most  anxious  to  make  an 
arrangement  by  which  both  powers  would  cease  the  con- 
struction of  so  many  warships,  but  a  decisive  supremacy 
over  the  German  Empire  they  were  firmly  resolved  to 
maintain.  Germans  were  not  willing  to  grant  a  "naval 
holiday,"  but  in  1913,  at  a  time  when  great  changes  in  the 
Balkans  caused  them  to  desire  increase  of  the  army  above 
all  things,  there  appeared  to  be  some  slackening  in  their 
building  of  warships,  and  peaceful  men  in  both  countries 
hoped  that  better  things  would  result. 

In  1912  Lord  Haldane,  lord  chancellor,  one  who  loved 
and  respected  German  things,  went  to  Berlin  on  the  em- 
peror's invitation,  to  try  to  bring  about  an  understanding. 


THE  TRIPLE  ALLIANCE  375 

Germany  proposed  a  treaty  between  the  two  countries  by 
which  each  would  engage  not  to  attack  the  other;  in  event 
of  either  being  involved  in  war,  the  otjher  should  ob- 
serve toward  the  party  involved  a  benevolent  neutrality, 
though  this  agreement  was  not  to  affect  existing  engage- 
ments. England  refused,  for  the  result  would  have  been 
to  permit  Germany  to  support  her  allies  in  the  Triple  Alli- 
ance, while  Britain  would  have  been  debarred  from  sup- 
porting against  German  attack  her  friends,  with  whom  she 
was  not  allied.  The  negotiation,  therefore,  failed  but  it 
seemed  to  smooth  the  way  for  a  settlement  later. 

Indeed,  in  the  earlier  part  of  1914  an  Anglo-German  The 
agreement  was  drawn  up,  by  which  all  the  principal  differ-  projected 
ences  between  England  and  Germany,  with  respect  to  the  ^^  ^^^^ 
Bagdad  Railway  and  Asiatic  Turkey  were  arranged,  and 
it  almost  seemed  that  Sir  Edward  Grey  had  at  last  done 
with  Germany  what  he  had  accomplished  with  France  in 
1904.  This  treaty,  it  is  said,  was  to  have  been  signed  in 
the  autumn,  but  before  that  time  the  Great  War  had  begun 
and  Germany  and  th§  British  Empire  were  locked  in  a  mor- 
tal struggle.  This  is  one  of  the  tragedies  in  the  history  of 
Europe.  The  two  great  antagonists  seem  almost  to  have 
reached  a  settlement  just  before  it  was  too  late.  But  it 
was  too  late.  It  is  probable  that  Great  Britain  was  sincere 
in  wishing  for  peaceable  settlement  of  the  issues  between 
Germany  and  herself.  What  were  the  real  German  in- 
tentions cannot  yet  be  known.  Doubtless  many  Germans 
sincerely  desired  to  have  friendship  and  good  understand- 
ing with  Britain.  But  some  critics  have  seen  good  reason 
to  believe  that  Germany  entered  into  the  negotiations  of 
1912  and  1914  not  so  much  because  she  wished  lasting 
peace  with  Great  Britain  but  because  the  military  leaders 
hoped  to  keep  her  inactive  until  they  had  first  dealt  with 
Russia  and  France.  Many  secrets  yet  lie  hid  in  state  pa- 
pers, or  the  breasts  of  the  men  who  were  leaders. 


876  EUROPE,   1789-1920 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Greneral  accounts:  G.  Egelhaaf,  Geschichie  der  Neuesten  Zeit 
(4th  ed.  1912);  G.  W.  Prothero,  German  Policy  before  the  War 
(1916) ;  Graf  Ernst  zu  Reventlow,  Deutschland*s  Auswdrtige  PoU 
itik,  1883-1913  (ed.  1914),  strongly  nationalist  and  Pan-Ger- 
man; T.  Schiemann,  Deutschland  und  die  Grosse  PolUik,  anno 
1901-19U  (1902-15);  Graf  Bernhard  von  Bulow,  Deutschland 
urder  Kaiser  WUhelm  II  (1914),  trans,  by  Marie  A.  Lewenz 
Imperial  Germany^  (1914). 

Treaty  of  Berlin:  G.  B.  Guarini,  La  Germania  e  la  Questione 
d'Oriente  fino  al  Congresso  di  Berlino,  2  vols.  (1898);  A.  Avril, 
NSgociations  Relatives  au  TraitS  de  Berlin,  1876-1886  (1886), 
documented,  best  account,  by  a  diplomat. 

The  Triple  Alliance:  A.  C.  Coolidge,  The  Origins  of  the  Triple 
Alliance  (1917);  A.  Singer,  Geschichte  des  Dreihundes  (1904); 
A.  N.  Stieglitz,  Vltalie  et  la  Triple  Alliance  (1906) ;  and  above 
all,  Politische  Geheimvertrdge  Oesterreich-Ungarns  von  1879-1914* 
volume  I  (1919),  edited  by  Dr.  A.  F.  Pribram  from  the  archives 
of  Vienna,  constituting  one  of  the  most  important  contributions 
to  the  history  of  diplomacy  for  some  time,  English  trans,  by 
D.  P.  Myers  and  J.  G.  D'A.  Paul,  ed.  by  A.  C.  Coolidge  (1920). 

Relations  with  Russia:  S.  Goriainov,  "The  End  of  the 
Alliance  of  the  Emperors,"  American  Historical  Review,  January 
1918,  based  on  papers  in  the  Russian  archives  made  accessible 
by  the  Russian  Revolution,  and  explaining  certain  important 
matters  for  the  first  time. 

Germany  and  England :  Charles  Sarolea,  The  Anglo-German 
Prohlmi  (1915) ;  B.  E.  Schmitt,  England  and  Germany,  1740-19U 
(1916);  Archibald  Hurd  and  Henry  Castle,  German  Sea-Power 
(1913). 

The  Bagdad  Railway:  Andre  Cheradame,  Le  Chemin  de  Per 
de  Bagdad  (1903);  D.  Eraser,  The  Short  Cut  to  India  (1909); 
Morris  Jastrow,  The  War  and  the  Bagdad  Railway  (1917) ;  Paul 
Rohrbach,  Die  Bagdadbahn  (1902). 

Biographies  and  memoirs:  H.  Welschinger,  VEmpereur 
FrSdSric  III,  1831-1888  (1917);  A.  H.  Fried,  The  German  Em- 
peror and  the  Peace  of  the  World  (1912) ;  The  German  Emperor  as 
Shovm  in  his  Public  Utterances,  edited  by  Christian  Gauss  (1915); 
Furst  Chlodwig  zu  Hohenlohe-Schillingsfurst,  DenTcwilrdigkeiten, 
2  vols.  ed.  (1907),  trans,  by  G.  W.  Chrystal  (1906). 


CHAPTER    IV 

THE    RECOVERY    OF    FRANCE  — THE 
DUAL    ALLIANCE 

Francais! 

Le  peuple  a  devance  la  Chambre,  qui  hesitait.  Pour  sauver  la  patrie 
en  danger,  il  a  demande  la  Republique. 

Proclamation  du  Gouvernment  de  la  Defense  Nationale  aux 
Francais,  Septembre  4, 1870;  Archives  DiplomatiqneSy  1871-1872, 
ii.  503. 

Si  la  France  est  attaquee  par  TAllemagne,  ou  par  I'ltalie  soutenue 
par  TAllemagne,  la  Russie  emploiera  toutes  ses  forces  disponibles 
pour  attaquer  rAllemagne. 

Si  la  Russie  est  attaquee  par  I'Allemagne,  ou  par  TAutriche  soutenue 
par  rAllemagne,  la  France  emploiera  toutes  ses  forces  disponibles 
pour  combattre  I'Allemagne. 

Military  Convention,  August  1892  (Basis  of  the  Dual  Alliance) : 
Documents    Diplomatiques,    U Alliance   Franco-Russe  (1918). 

If  the  rise  of  the  German  Empire  is  the  most  memorable 
example  of  swift  growth  of  a  European  power,  France  after 
1871  affords  the  best  instance  of  the  recovery  of  a  people 
crushed  down  by  fearful  defeat.  Before  1870  France  was 
the  leading  power  on  the  Continent;  but  the  events  of  the 
Franco-Prussian  War  changed  all  this  suddenly  and  com- 
pletely. The  months  between  July  1870  and  June  1871 
were  afterward  remembered  by  the  French  as  L'AnnSe 
Terrible,  the  Terrible  Year.  In  the  course  of  that  time 
France  had  been  crushed  to  the  dust  by  the  enemy,  then 
torn  by  the  uprising  of  the  Commune  in  Paris.  She  had 
lost  two  important  frontier  provinces  with  1,600,000 
inhabitants;  in  the  war  itself  she  had  suffered  casualties 

377 


The  down- 
fall of 
France 


378 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Quick 

recovery 


Further 
disaster 


Sttifering 
in  Paris 


of  almost  half  a  million;  her  war  materials  had  been  cap- 
tured; the  Germans  had  carried  destruction  and  suffering 
over  a  wide  extent  of  the  country;  there  had  been  an  in- 
demnity of  five  milliards  of  francs  to  pay  the  victors;  while 
the  cost  of  the  war  had  been  ten  milliards  more.  Germans 
believed  that  France  was  so  far  crushed  that  she  could  not 
recover  or  be  dangerous  to  them  for  a  long  time  again, 
and  the  friends  of  France  could  only  look  to  the  future  with 
a  hope  they  could  not  yet  feel. 

I  Actually,  she  began  to  recover  almost  at  once.  No  na- 
tion in  the  world  has  ever  had  the  qualities  of  greatness 
more  thoroughly  than  France.  From  the  ruin  of  the 
Hundred  Years'  War,  from  the  losses  of  her  wars  of  religion, 
from  the  disasters  of  the  last  years  of  Louis  XIV,  and  from 
the  complete  overthrow  when  Napoleon  was  defeated  by 
Europe,  always  she  recovered  easily  and  well,  because  of 
the  excellence  and  strength,  the  vitality,  the  brave  charac- 
ter, the  inexhaustible  courage  of  French  men  and  women. 
At  present,  after  the  long  exhaustion  of  the  Great  War  in 
which  she  bore  the  brunt,  the  best  augury  of  the  recovery 
of  France  from  her  grievous  weakness  is  the  memory  of 
what  she  has  done  in  other  times.  And  for  Germany  in 
this  time  of  humiliation  and  ruin  the  example  of  France 
may  be,  perhaps,  the  best  encouragement  she  can  have. 

Before  the  recovery  began,  however,  there  was  one  more 
terrible  disaster.  A  period  of  great  change  and  disorder 
ever  gives  opportunity  to  the  violent  and  radical  among 
men.  Some  of  the  French  people  had  just  suffered  so 
terribly  that  they  were  like  those  whom  long  suffering  has 
made  mad.  Such  things  have  been  often  before:  during 
the  Hundred  Years'  War  when  the  Jacquerie  rose  in  France; 
on  a  great  scale  in  Russia,  after  the  awful  disasters  of  1916 
and  1917;  and  in  many  parts  of  Germany,  after  the  empire 
had  fallen. 

The  Commune  of  Paris  came  at  the  end  of  the  war,  while 
confusion  still  reigned  in  France.    Paris  had  long  been  a 


THE  DUAL  ALLIANCE  379 

stronghold  of  republican,  radical,  and  socialist  sentiment. 
Many  of  the  workmen  of  the  city  had  listened  to  doctrines 
opposed  to  the  existing  social  system,  and  they  had  been 
taught  that  very  sweeping  changes  would  be  necessary  to 
bring  happiness  to  the  mass  of  the  people.  The  siege  of 
Paris  was  just  over,  and  Paris  had  greatly  suffered.  Many 
of  the  workingmen  had  no  employment  in  the  general  pros- 
tration of  business.  They  had  until  recently  been  mem- 
bers of  the  National  Guard  which  undertook  the  defence 
of  the  city,  but  the  Assembly  which  had  been  elected  to 
make  peace  with  the  Germans  dissolved  the  Guard.  The 
people  of  Paris  had  proclaimed  a  republic  in  1870;  the  As- 
sembly was  monarchist  and  conservative;  and  the  liberals 
and  radicals  of  the  cities  distrusted  what  it  might  do. 
Moreover,  payment  of  obligations,  which  had  been  sus- 
pended by  a  moratorium  during  the  siege,  was  now  ordered, 
and  immense  hardship  resulted  to  a  large  number  of  people 
who  had  no  employment  or  business  and  so  could  not  pay 
their  debts.  Hence  a  great  number  of  poor,  hungry,  sav- 
age people,  who  still  had  the  arms  with  which  they  had 
fought  against  the  Germans,  stood  in  idleness  distrusting 
their  government,  and  very  ready  to  follow  new  leaders. 

In  France  the  government  was  strongly  centralized.     The 
The  radicals  believed  that  improvement  could  come  only     Commune 
through  decentralization  of  the  state  into  small  parts  or     Jgyi"*^* 
communes,  with  the  management  of  affairs  in  these  parts. 
Thus  the  different  communes,  which  had  different  interests, 
would  be  able  to  manage  affairs  to  their  best  advantage; 
and  the  cities,  more  liberal  than  the  rural  districts,  would 
be  able  to  develop  without  interference  from  a  govern- 
ment based  largely  on  the  country.     This  scheme'  was 
supported  by  some  republicans  who  feared  that  monarchy 
would  be  restored  by  the  central  government,  and  by  so- 
cialists, who  believed  that  in  communes  they  could  effect 
the  reforms  which  they  sought  for.     In  Paris  the  idea  was 
taken  up  by  the  discontented.     After  some  conflict  with 


SJBO 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

indemnity 
paid 


Local  gov- 
ernment and 
the  army 


the  Assembly,  a  commune  was  established  in  March  1871, 
and  the  red  flag  of  the  socialists  adopted.  The  men  of  the 
Commune  appealed  to  the  people  of  France  to  follow  them 
in  their  revolution,  and  for  a  moment  it  seemed  to  observers 
that  France,  just  defeated  by  the  Germans,  was  now 
about  to  split  up  into  pieces.  But  the  people  were  against 
such  innovation.  As  the  French  prisoners  returned  from 
Germany,  the  Assembly  made  ready  to  overthrow  the 
Commune,  and  this  was  done  after  a  second  terrible  siege 
during  April  and  May,  and  a  fearful  week  of  fighting  in  the 
streets.  The  city  suffered  far  more  terribly  from  the  bom- 
bardment of  the  French  armies  and  the  incendiarism  of  the 
Communalists  than  it  had  from  the  Germans;  and  the 
government  showed  no  mercy  in  the  vengeance  which  it 
took. 

France  now  proceeded  to  the  work  of  restoration  and 
building  for  the  future.  May  10,  1871  the  Treaty  of 
Frankfort  was  ratified  by  the  National  Assembly.  The 
first  task  was  now  to  set  free  the  occupied  districts  from 
the  Germans  by  paying  the  indemnity.  The  French 
people  responded  magnificently  to  the  government's 
appeals,  and  far  more  money  was  subscribed  to  loans 
than  was  needed.  In  the  autumn  of  1873,  six  months  be- 
fore the  terms  allowed  by  the  Treaty,  all  the  indemnity 
had  been  paid,  and  the  last  German  soldiers  were  out  of 
the  country.  Financiers  all  over  the  world  were  surprised 
at  the  money  which  French  peasants  and  workmen 
brought  forth;  and  there  were  not  wanting  Germans  who 
declared  that  if  France  were  ever  conquered  by  Germany 
again,  the  indemnity  would  be  vastly  greater. 

For  two  years  the  executive  power  was  wielded  by 
Thiers,  whom  the  Assembly  had  chosen.  During  his  time 
two  important  reforms  were  made.  In  1871  the  excessive 
centralization  of  the  government,  which  had  prevailed 
since  Napoleon  I,  was  partly  undone.  A  considerable 
amount  of  local  government  was  established:  local  voters 


THE  DUAL  ALLIANCE 


381 


were  to  elect  the  council  of  the  Commune,  and  in  the  smaller 
communes  the  mayor  was  to  be  chosen  by  the  council,  the 
central  government  appointing  the  mayors  only  in  the 
principal  towns.  In  1872  the  army  system  was  reorgan- 
ized, by  a  law  which  in  effect  introduced  the  military 
system  of  Prussia. 

As  the  work  of  reconstruction  proceeded  the  most  im- 
portant problem  was  to  settle  the  government.  The  As- 
sembly had  been  elected  for  the  purpose  of  making  peace 
with  the  Germans.  When  this  was  done  it  did  not  dis- 
solve itself,  and  in  the  existing  state  of  things  there  was 
no  power  able  to  dismiss  it.  In  September  1870  the  re- 
volutionists in  Paris,  who  overthrew  the  Imperial  govern- 
ment, had  proclaimed  a  republic.  This  republic  had 
been  promptly  acknowledged  by  the  United  States,  and, 
after  a  little  delay,  by  the  principal  governments  of  Europe. 
Such  a  government  had  not  been  constituted  by  the  people. 
In  August  1871,  however,  the  Assembly  accepted  for  the 
time  being  the  government  existing,  and  gave  to  the  execu- 
tive the  title  of  "  President  of  the  French  Republic."  The 
Rivet  Law  by  which  this  was  done  asserted  also  that  the 
Assembly  had  constituent  powers.  Accordingly,  the 
Assembly  undertook  to  decide  what  form  of  government 
should  be  permanently  established. 

Most  of  the  members  of  the  Assembly  wished  a  restora- 
tion of  the  monarchy,  while  some  hoped  for  a  Bonapartist 
Empire  again.  Perhaps  monarchy  might  have  been  re- 
stored now,  except  that  its  advocates  were  divided  in  two 
parties,  the  Legitimists  and  those  who  supported  the  House 
of  Orleans.  It  was  hoped  that  the  two  branches  of  the 
Bourbon  family  could  unite,  but  it  proved  impossible  to 
bring  this  about.  Thus  time  drifted  on,  with  no  perma- 
nent government  established,  and  the  people  showing  more 
and  more  that  they  desired  a  republic.  AjFter  a  while 
those  who  wished  for  a  monarchy,  but  believed  it  unwise 
to  insist  on  their  wishes,  combined  with  those  who  wanted 


The 

National 

Assembly 


The 

Republic 

established 


882 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The    French 
government: 
the 
executive 


The 

legislative 


a  republic,  and  agreed  to  establish  a  conservative  arrange- 
ment. In  1875  a  series  of  "organic  laws"  in  effect  consti- 
tuted a  republican  government,  and  are  often  referred  to 
as  the  Constitution  of  1875.  A  republic  was  not  formally 
set  up.  It  was,  indeed,  merely  recognized  in  the  phrase 
"President  of  the  Republic,"  in  a  provision  which  could 
only  be  carried  by  one  vote  in  a  chamber  of  705.  The 
French  Republic,  therefore,  was  established  unwillingly  and 
with  great  hesitation,  and  it  was  not  formally  proclaimed. 

The  government  of  the  French  Republic  was  based  on 
models  which  the  English-speaking  people  had  worked  out 
in  the  experience  of  a  long  time.  In  some  respects  it  re- 
sembles the  American  form,  but  substantially  the  British 
system  was  followed.  The  executive  power  is  apparently 
vested  in  a  president,  who  is  elected  for  seven  years  by  the 
two  chambers  of  the  legislative  body  meeting  together  as  a 
National  Assembly.  An  outsider  might  think  that  he 
really  is  head  of  the  army  and  navy  and  that  he  really  car- 
ries out  the  laws  and  appoints  the  officials.  Actually, 
.however,  as  in  England,  the  executive  and  administrative 
powers  are  in  the  hands  of  the  ministry.  As  in  Great 
Britain,  the  ministry  is  entirely  dependent  upon  a  majority 
in  the  Chambers,  the  legislative  body. 

The  legislature  is  composed  of  two  houses,  a  Senate  and 
a  Chamber  of  Deputies.  The  Senate  consists  of  300  mem- 
bers elected  indirectly  by  electoral  colleges  for  a  term  of 
nine  years,  one  third  renewed  every  three  years.  By  the 
Constitution  of  1875  some  of  the  members  were  to  be 
elected  for  life,  but  this  was  done  away  with  in  1884.  The 
more  important«branch  is  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  whose 
members  are  elected  by  universal  suffrage  for  a  term  of 
four  years.  The  ministry  is  responsible  to  this  parliament, 
practically  to  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  which  is  all-power- 
ful in  the  making  of  laws  and  passing  appropriations. 
Actually,  the  ministry  is  a  committee  of  the  Chamber,  as 
the  cabinet  in  Britain  is  of  the  House  of  Commons. 


THE  DUAL  ALLIANCE 


383 


This  system  of  government  which  makes  France  a  par- 
liamentary repubHc,  differs  in  one  very  important  respect 
from  the  British  system.  In  Great  Britain,  as  in  the  United 
States,  there  have  usually  been  two  important  parties, 
opposing  each  other,  and  contending  in  elections  for  con- 
trol of  the  government.  This  system  tends  to  make 
political  stability  in  Great  Britain,  since  the  ministry 
often  rests  on  the  solid  support  of  the  majority  party. 
But  in  France,  as  in  most  Continental  countries,  there  are 
many  parties,  often  differing  from  each  other  only  a  little. 
No  one  of  them  is  large  enough  to  control  a  majority  of  the 
votes  in  the  legislative  assembly,  and  support  for  a  minis- 
try can  be  obtained  only  by  effecting  a  combination,  or, 
as  it  is  called  in  France,  a  bloc,  of  those  parties  which  are 
willing  to  make  common  cause.  Often  this  brings  insta- 
bility and  shortness  of  tenure,  since  the  fall  of  a  ministry 
can  easily  be  brought  about  by  some  of  the  parties  with- 
drawing from  the  bloc  to  enter  into  new  combinations. 
Therefore  ministries  in  France,  as  in  Italy,  may  change 
with  bewildering  rapidity,  causing  outsiders  uninformed 
to  believe  that  the  French  are  fickle  in  politics  and  not  yet 
trained  in  governing  themselves.  Such  is,  of  course,  not 
the  case.  Foreign  critics  declare  that  such  insecurity  of 
ministries  tends  to  weaken  administration  and  hamper 
France  in  her  dealings  with  other  countries;  Frenchmen, 
admitting  this,  assert  that  their  system  represents  more 
delicately  than  the  British,  different  shades  of  political 
thought. 

Generally  speaking,  since  the  establishment  of  the 
Republic  in  1875,  Frenchmen  have  gone  steadily  forward 
on  the  way  of  learning  real  self-government.  They  tried 
to  estabHsh  it  suddenly  in  1791.  In  a  few  years  it  was 
evident  they  had  failed.  Again  in  1848  a  republic  was 
established,  but  this  again  was  easily  and  quickly  over- 
thrown. When  a  third  republic  was  proclaimed  in  1870, 
it  might  seem  that  it  also  had  little  chance  to  survive; 


Political 
parties 


The  bloc 


Self- 
government 
in   France 


884  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

many  were  opposed  to  it,  and  many  believed  it  must  soon 
disappear.  The  Third  Republic,  however,  acquired  sta- 
bility year  after  year,  and  by  1920  it  was  so  thoroughly 
established  that  its  overthrow  seemed  outside  of  proper 
calculation.  This  was  partly  because  the  people  of  France 
got  more  and  more  acquaintance  with  self-government  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century.  It  is  not  suffi- 
cient that  a  constitution  be  written  and  adopted  providing 
that  the  people  have  certain  institutions.  Such  constitu- 
tions in  Portugal  and  in  Spain  and  in  some  of  the  South 
American  countries  result  in  little  more  than  that  the 
elections  are  controlled  by  the  army  and  the  government 
by  a  few  politicians;  for  most  of  the  people  have  little 
education,  little  interest  in  political  affairs,  and  almost  no 
training  in  them.  Great  Britain  has  no  written  constitu- 
tion in  any  single  document,  and  yet  her  government  con- 
tinues stable  and  firm,  and  at  the  same  time  flexible  and 
increasingly  democratic;  for  it  rests  now  on  the  support  of 
a  great  number  of  men  and)^omen  who  have  considerable 
acquaintance  with  the  management  of  their  government, 
and  who  have  inherited  this  knowledge  from  ancestors  who 
had  interest  in  the  government  before  them. 
Local  self-  The  continued  success  of  self-government  among  the 

government  people  of  England  is  in  great  measure  due  to  the  training 
which  English  people  long  had  in  the  affairs  of  county  and 
parish,  to  the  vigorous  local  self-government  which  has 
existed  for  generations  in  England.  In  France  this  had 
once  existed  also,  but  it  withered  away  and  disappeared 
when  the  strongly  centralized  monarchy  of  the  old  regime 
was  made  by  the  kings.  Matters,  which  in  England  would 
have  been  attended  to  by  the  leading  men  of  the  county 
or  the  parish,  were  directed  from  Paris  or  managed  by 
officials  sent  out  from  the  central  government.  This 
tended  to  produce,  as  it  always  does  for  a  while,  a  very 
efficient  government  machine;  but  in  course  of  time  the 
people  in  the  localities,  having  very  little  to  do  in  manag- 


THE  DUAL  ALLIANCE  385 

ing  their  affairs,  to  a  great  extent  lost  their  capacity  for 
self-government.  Therefore,  the  first  French  republics 
were  made  at  the  top  rather  than  the  bottom,  and  soon  fell 
for  lack  of  strong  foundation  in  the  political  experience  of 
the  people  themselves.  This  was,  perhaps,  apparent  to 
the  republican  leaders  as  time  went  on.  By  the  Constitu- 
tion of  1875  a  greater  measure  of  local  government  was 
provided  for;  this  was  extended  in  1882,  when  the  elected 
councils  of  municipalities  were  permitted  to  elect  the 
mayors;  and  in  1884  when  localities  were  given  still  larger 
powers  of  self-government.  Since  then  the  French  people 
have  been  slowly  learning  to  some  extent  the  art  of  govern- 
ing themselves,  in  the  places  where  they  live  and  carry 
on  their  affairs. 

It  was  well  understood  by  the  republican  leaders  in  Education 
France  that  if  there  was  to  be  universal  suffrage  for  men, 
there  must  be  general  education  of  the  children.  In  1881 
a  law  was  passed  to  make  primary  education  free  of  cost 
to  parents,  and  next  year  it  was  made  compulsory  for  child- 
ren from  six  to  thirteen.  Previous  to  this  time  a  quarter 
of  the  men  and  more  than  a  third  of  the  women  of  the 
country  were  illiterate,  and  education  was  to  a  considerable 
extent,  as  it  had  long  been,  in  the  hands  of  religious  orders 
and  teachers.  Gradually  education  was  extended  until 
very  few  men  and  women  were  unable  to  read  and  write,  , 
though  the  percentage  of  illiteracy  was  never  reduced  so 
low  as  in  Germany,  which  had  long  led  the  world  in  the 
thoroughness  and  extent  of  its  educational  work,  though 
not,  perhaps,  in  the  excellence  of  its  character.  Gradually 
also,  education  was  made  entirely  secular,  and  withdrawn 
completely  from  religious  teachers.  And  along  with  this, 
went  splendid  development  of  higher  education,  in  upper 
schools  and  universities.  Technical  and  industrial  teach- 
ing were  not  neglected,  though  they  never  attained  the 
prominence  or  the  reputation  abroad  that  the  German 
system  got.     Foreigners  who  went  abroad  for  their  edu- 


886 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Reputation 
abroad 


Prosperity 
and  im- 
provement 


Difficulties 


cation  went  almost  always  to  the  German  Empire  rather 
than  to  England  or  France;  and  this  was  especially  true 
of  students  from  the  United  States,  who  went  to  Germany 
and  then  developed  in  America  the  German  system  of 
higher  education.  This  was  due  not  only  to  the  merits  of 
German  universities  but  to  the  prestige  of  Germany  from 
her  mighty  development  and  successful  wars,  from  adver- 
tising and  clever  propaganda.  But  critics  realized  more 
clearly  after  a  time,  that  the  English  system,  and  especially 
the  French,  not  only  produced  erudition,  but  trained  the 
character,  cultivated  spirit  and  taste,  fineness  of  soul  and 
good  judgment,  in  a  way  which  the  more  mechanically 
regulated,  state-supervised  system  of  Germany  never 
could  do. 

Bismarck,  it  is  said,  favored  a  French  republic  since  he 
believed  such  a  government  would  be  unstable  and  weak, 
and  because  it  would  keep  France  isolated  and  without 
friends  among  the  monarchies  and  empires  of  Europe. 
For  a  long  time  she  was  without  allies,  but  the  Republic 
held  its  own  steadily,  and  while  it  was  disliked  by  a  con- 
siderable and  powerful  portion  of  the  population  who  were 
anxiously  awaiting  its  overthrow,  it  was  able  to  weather 
each  crisis  that  developed.  Business  became  settled;  the 
government  undertook  vast  and  expensive  schemes  of 
material  development,  improving  railroads  and  canals,  and 
presently  the  French  people  found  themselves  in  the  midst 
of  the  greatest  prosperity  which  had  come  to  them  in  the 
nineteenth  century.  Taxes  were  high  and  there  was  a 
huge  national  debt,  but  this  debt  was  held  almost  entirely^ 
in  France,  and  interest  payments  on  it,  derived  from 
taxes  taken  from  the- people,  went  back  to  them  again. 

But  however  fair  the  picture  may  seem  now,  there  was 
much  trouble  while  the  improvement  was  taking  place, 
and  often  it  seemed  that  the  Republic  would  endure  little 
longer.  There  was  constant  though  diminishing  danger 
in  the  relations  with  Germany,  and  there  were  internal 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


387 


problems  of  the  greatest  difficulty  resulting  from  opposi- 
tion of  the  monarchists  and  clericals  and  the  relations 
between  Church  and  State. 

The  English  have  altered  their  monarchy  so  far  that  of 
the  kingship  little  remains  but  the  name  of  king,  and 
actually  their  government  is  far  more  democratic  than 
most  republics.  They  have  clung  to  king  and  some  monar- 
chical forms,  however,  because  of  attachment  to  the 
past,  and  will  probably  for  some  time  to  come  be  reluc- 
tant to  part  with  scepter  and  crown.  The  French,  who  are 
more  logical  and  direct  in  processes  of  thought,  did  away 
with  monarchy  abruptly,  though  in  their  case  also  the  pro- 
cess could  not  be  achieved  at  once,  and  restorations,  of 
king  or  emperor  followed  the  establishment  of  two  re- 
publics. The  more  conservative  and  those  who  loved  to 
venerate  the  past,  who  preferred  monarchy  to  republic, 
distrusted  government  by  the  people,  and  did  not  believe 
that  France  could  be  strong  and  respected  until  she  had  a 
king  once  more.  These  men  and  women  looked  confidently 
for  the  fall  of  the  republic  after  a  while  through  incapacity 
and  weakness;  and  when  the  course  of  time  disappointed 
them,  they  plotted  and  hoped  for  an  opportunity  to  bring 
this  about. 

When  the  hazards  of  the  first  few  years  after  1871  had 
been  successfully  passed,  the  most  dangerous  crisis  came 
in  1888.  General  Boulanger,  a  handsome,  striking  figure, 
whose  very  appearance  excited  the  admiration  and  attach- 
ment of  the  unthinking,  had  made  himself  popular  among 
the  soldiers  by  his  measures  while  Minister  of  War.  He 
took  advantage  of  some  scandals  of  the  time,  and  of  certain 
grievances  which  always  exist,  and  presently  let  it  be  known 
that  the  government  needed  reforming.  It  was  also  told 
among  his  friends  that  if  he  were  at  the  head  of  affairs, 
France  might  get  revenge  on  the  Germans.  He  soon  had 
supporting  him,  besides  the  undiscriminating  multitude, 
monarchists,   clericals,   and   others;   and   friends  of   the 


The 
monarchists 


General 
Boulanger 


888 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

Dreyfus 
Case 


Church     , 
and  State 


Republic  feared  that  if  he  tried  a  coup  (TStat  as  Louis  Na- 
poleon once  had,  he  might  indeed  be  able  to  seize  power. 
But  the  government  was  firm,  and  at  the  critical  moment 
he  hesitated  to  act,  and  presently  fled  to  Belgium.  Then 
he  was  condemned  for  plotting  against  the  state.  His 
party  fell  to  pieces  almost  at  once,  and  he  died  by  his  own 
hand  in  exile.  Other  disquieting  times  followed,  but  never 
one  so  serious  again. 

In  1896  began  the  scandal  of  the  Dreyfus  Case,  which 
continued  to  disrupt  French  society  and  disturb  the  gov- 
ernment for  the  next  ten  years.  Dreyfus,  an  Alsatian  Jew, 
a  captain  of  artillery  in  the  French  army,  had  been  ar- 
rested very  secretly  and  condemned  to  be  imprisoned  for 
life  in  French  Guiana  for  selling  military  information. 
He  protested  his  innocence.  Soon  his  cause  was  taken 
up  by  friends  and  others,  and  a  bitter  and  sensational  con- 
troversy arose.  After  many  vicissitudes,  it  was  demon- 
strated that  the  accused  man  was  innocent  and  that 
scandalous  conditions  existed  in  military  circles.  In  the 
end  the  French  government  gave  Dreyfus  and  his  associates 
complete  and  honorable  vindication;  but  during  the  years 
of  passionate  struggle,  while  this  was  being  attained,  the 
government  was  attacked  and  undermined  by  monarchists 
and  reactionaries,  by  clericals,  and  by  many  who  desired 
France  to  be  a  military  power  more  than  a  democratic 
state.    Finally  all  this  came  to  naught. 

As  the  years  went  on,  with  France  prospering  greatly 
and  the  Republic  growing  constantly  stronger,  the  govern- 
ment proceeded  to  deal  with  the  diflacult  matter  of  the 
relations  between  Church  and  State.  In  the  Middle  Ages 
the  Church  had  claimed  superiority  over  all  earthly  things, 
and  immunity  from  interference  by  the  civil  power.  As 
stronger  secular  governments  developed,  their  oflScials  re- 
fused to  accept  the  supremacy  of  the  Church  in  the  State, 
and  attempted,  while  not  interfering  with  religious  mat- 
ters, to  subject  ecclesiastical  matters,  or  the  things  which 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


389 


concerned  Church  regulation,  to  the  civil  authority  of  the 
State.  Thus  arose  some  of  the  greatest  and  most  memor- 
able struggles  in  medieval  times.  Li  the  period  of  the 
Reformation  and  of  the  development  of  strong-nation 
states,  the  matter  was  settled  differently  in  various  places. 
In  Lutheran  countries  the  Church  was  made  strictly  sub- 
ordinate to  the  State,  and  in  England  the  Church  became 
part  of  the  government  itself.  In  Catholic  countries  var- 
ious arrangements  had  been  worked  out. 

In  France  the  settlement  now  was  based  on  the  Concor- 
dat  of  1801.  This  arrangement  provided  that  the  churches 
and  buildings,  which  were  in  1801  the  property  of  the 
people,  should  be  granted  to  the  use  of  the  clergy;  the 
higher  ecclesiastics,  the  archbishops  and  bishops,  were  to 
be  appointed  by  the  French  government  with  the  consent 
of  the  Pope;  the  lower  ecclesiastics,  the  priests,  were  to  be 
appointed  by  the  bishops,  with  the  consent  of  the  govern- 
ment of  France.  The  Church  was  thus  controlled  to 
a  considerable  extent  by  the  State,  and  supported  by  it 
as  part  of  the  State,  for  the  salaries  of  the  ecclesiastics  were 
paid  by  the  government;  on  the  other  hand  in  the  govern- 
ment the  Church  had  much  influence  and  power.  This 
condition  of  affairs  continued  on  through  the  nineteenth 
century,  with  the  clericals  looking  back  fondly  to  the  times 
before  the  Revolution,  detesting  the  republicans,  and 
supporting  and  teaching  monarchical  principles  and  hop- 
ing for  a  restoration  of  kings.  The  bishops  and  priests 
did  not  hesitate  to  use  their  influence  against  the  Republic. 
Meanwhile  the  government  removed  all  clerical  influence 
from  the  national  system  of  education,  allowing  no  re- 
ligious exercises  in  the  schools  and  not  permitting  clergy- 
men to  teach  in  them.  Almost  all  of  the  population  was 
Roman  Catholic,  but  a  great  part  of  the  men  were  held 
lightly  by  religious  ties,  and  decided  matters  affecting  the 
country  from  the  point  of  view  of  politics  rather  than 
religion.     Accordingly  they  now  proceeded  to  measures 


The 

Concordat 
of  1801 


The  Church 
hostile  to  the 
Republic 


890 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  SUte 

takes 

measures 

against 

religious 

orders 


Separation 
of  Church 
and  State, 
1905 


which  had  never  before  been  brought  about  in  a  Roman 
Catholic  country  except  in  violent  change  or  upheaval. 

The  republican  leaders  declared  that  there  could  not  be 
national  unity  while  the  religious  orders,  which  had  in 
recent  years  increased  enormously  in  influence  and  wealth, 
engaged  in  teaching  hostile  to  the  government.  Accord- 
ingly, in  1901  the  government  passed  the  so-called  Law  of 
Associations,  by  which  religious  orders  were  not  allowed  to 
exist  unless  authorized  by  the  State.  Many  of  the  religious 
orders  were  Aot  willing  to  ask  the  government  for  per- 
mission to  exist,  the  law  was  vigorously  enforced,  and  large 
numbers  of  monks  and  nuns  were  driven  out  of  their  es- 
tabhshments.  In  1904  the  government  went  further, 
passing  an  act  which  forbade  even  the  authorized  orders 
to  do  any  teaching  after  1914.  All  this  was  denounced  by 
the  faithful,  who  supported  the  orders,  and  who  believed 
that  their  own  liberty  was  infringed  when  they  were 
deprived  of  the  right  to  have  their  children  taught  by  the 
instructors  they  most  preferred.  '  The  State,  however,  was 
now  resolved  to  have  a  monopoly  of  the  education  of  its 
children. 

Matters  went  much  further.  Many  Frenchmen  re- 
garded Roman  Catholicism,  as  well  as  other  religions,  as 
something  to  be  cherished  by  those  who  wished  it,  but 
not  imposed  by  the  State  or  supported  by  government 
taxes;  reasoning  thus  with  the  tolerant  or  contemptuous 
feeling  which  Voltaire  and  Diderot  had  long  before  them. 
Many  others  believed  that  clericalism  was  hostile  to  the 
Republic,  that  the  priests  as  well  as  the  members  of  the 
teaching  orders  aroused  opposition  to  the  government  and 
made  division  and  weakness  in  the  nation.  They  sup- 
ported the  principle,  therefore,  that  Church  and  State 
should  be  separate,  and  that  while  the  Church  in  its  reli- 
gious capacity  was  not  to  be  interfered  with  by  the  govern- 
ment, it  was  not  any  longer  to  be  supported  by  the  govern- 
ment, but  by  voluntary  contributions  from  its  members. 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


391 


In  1905  this  was  effected  by  a  law  which  annulled  the  Con- 
cordat.  Something  was  to  be  done  for  aged  clergymen 
and  for  those  who  had  just  become  priests,  but  the  State 
was  no  longer  to  pay  the  salaries  of  churchmen,  nor  was 
it  any  longer  to  control  their  appointments.  The  church 
buildings,  still  national  property,  might  be  used  freely  by 
members  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  or  of  other  sects, 
provided  the  members  of  a  congregation  formed  an  associa- 
tion cultuelle  (association  of  worship). 

This  arrangement,  which  seemed  proper  to  Frenchmen 
who  were  without  strong  religious  ties,  violated  a  great 
deal  that  was  deeply  rooted  in  a  venerable  past  and  loved 
and  respected  by  many  men  and  most  women  in  France. 
There  had  been  a  great  deal  of  sympathy  for  the  members 
of  religious  orders,  who  seemed  dispossessed  of  their  prop- 
erty and  driven  forth  from  their  homes;  now  there  were 
riotous  scenes  about  some  of  the  churches.  Not  a  few 
Catholics,  however,  believed  that  the  trend  of  modern 
conditions  made  separation  best  for  the  Church;  and  some 
of  the  ecclesiastics  were  willing  at  last  to  compromise  with 
the  authorities  of  the  State.  But  the  Pope  condemned  the 
law,  and  good  Catholics  had  then  to  oppose  it.  In  1907 
the  government  passed  a  further  law  by  which  the  churches 
might  be  used,  provided  the  priest  or  minister  made  a  con- 
tract therefor  with  the  local  oflScial.  The  Republic  was 
stirred  to  its  depths  during  the  years  that  followed, 
but  the  authorities,  supported  by  socialists,  progressives, 
radicals,  and  others,  were  firm,  and  in  the  end  seemed  to 
have  the  support  of  most  of  the  nation.  Nevertheless  it 
was  truly  felt  that  there  was  now  between  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church,  which  was  the  faith  at  least  nominally  of 
almost  all  of  the  French  people,  and  the  government  of 
the  Republic  a  breach  which  only  time  could  heal.  Act- 
ually the  division  continued  until  the  beginning  of  the 
Great  War,  when  in  the  fearful  danger  and  suffering  of  the 
time  churchmen  rallied  loyally  to  the  patrie,  and  many  of 


Troxibles 
enstiing 


Division 
in  France 


392 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Economic 
prosperity 


Property  and 
birth-rate 


Smaller 
families 


the  people  came  back  to  the  Church  more  than  for  a  great 
while  before. 

During  all  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century! 
wealth  increased  in  France  beyond  what  Frenchmen  had 
ever  had  before.  The  total  amount  of  this  wealth  was 
much  less  than  in  England  or  the  United  States,  and  the 
standard  of  living  was  lower  than  in  the  English-speaking 
countries;  but  there  was  a  high  average  prosperity  and 
wide  distribution  of  property.  This  arose  especially  from 
two  causes :  the  land  was  distributed  among  a  large  number 
of  proprietors,  and  the  size  of  families  was  small. 

In  France  one  of  the  most  important  results  of  the  Revo- 
lution was  that  the  lands  previously  owned  by  nobles  or 
Church  were  taken  from  their  owners  and  sold  by  the 
State  to  the  people.  In  this  way  a  great  deal  of  landed 
property  formerly  in  possession  of  a  few  wealthy  proprie- 
tors— as  was  the  case  in  Russia  until  the  Revolution  of 
1917,  and  as  was  largely  the  case  in  Britain  until  the  terri- 
ble taxation  of  the  War — changed  hands,  and  in  course  of 
time  was  sold  to  peasant  farmers.  The  result  of  this  was 
to  create  a  great  body  of  small  owners,  having  the  means 
of  achieving  more  prosperity  and  well-being  than  ever 
before.  Some  observers  who  lived  then  believed  that  this 
amelioration  was  only  for  the  time,  that  the  lands  would 
soon  pass  out  of  the  possession  of  the  new  owners,  or  else 
that  they,  having  more  children  because  they  could  sup- 
port them,  would  be  no  better  off,  and  that  when  the  hold- 
ings were  divided  up  among  these  larger  families  of  the 
next  generation,  there  would  again  be  miserable  cultivators 
living  upon  scanty  patches  of  ground.  Previous  to  this 
time  the  birth  rate  in  France  had  been  high.  Now  Arthur 
Young,  the  celebrated  traveler,  predicted  that  the  country 
would  become  a  veritable  rabbit-warren,  so  fast  would  the 
population  breed.  But  this  did  not  take  place.  About 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  English  econo- 
mist, John  Stuart  Mill,  noticed  that  the  French  birth  rate 


THE  DUAL  ALLIANCE 


393 


had  fallen,  and  that  families  were  smaller.  He  explained 
this  by  saying  that  the  new  body  of  proprietors  accustomed 
to  a  higher  standard  of  living,  refused  to  lower  it  by  having 
more  children  than  they  could  properly  support;  that  they 
were  unwilling  to  lower  the  standard  of  the  next  generation 
by  dividing  their  property  among  so  many  children  that 
the  amount  for  each  would  be  insuflScient. 

All  through  the  century  this  tendency  continued  with 
ever  greater  force.  By  the  time  of  the  Franco-Prussian 
War  the  population  of  the  country  was  no  longer  increasing 
rapidly,  and  since  that  time  it  has  scarcely  increased  at  all. 
The  results  have  seemed  good  and  bad.  On  the  one  hand 
there  has  been  a  generally  high  standard  of  living.  For 
many  Frenchmen  there  has  been  a  great  amount  of  leisure 
and  comfort,  which  has  enabled  them  to  be  the  foremost 
leaders  of  civilization  and  thought,  and  to  enjoy  deeply, 
in  their  manner,  the  civilization  of  their  era.  On  the  other 
hand  the  population  of  France  has  stood  still  while  that  of 
England  has  overtaken  it,  and  while  that  of  Germany 
threatened  to  become  twice  as  large.  Hence,  there  was 
always  the  danger  that  France  might  be  overwhelmed  by 
superior  numbers.  Vainly  the  government  tried  to  en- 
courage larger  families,  offering  to  exempt  the  fathers  of 
several  children  from  taxation,  and  even  offering  prizes  to 
the  mothers  of  large  families.  There  were  a  few  large  fam- 
ilies, but  generally  the  birth  rate  remained  so  low  that  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  there  was  much 
fear  that  the  population  might  even  be  declining.  Ene- 
mies of  France  declared  that  this  stationary  or  declining 
population  and  small  birth-rate  showed  that  the  French 
were  a  decadent  people,  and  that,  as  in  the  dying  Roman 
Empire  long  before,  there  was  no  longer  enough  vigor  to 
produce  the  men  and  women  to  carry  on  the  destiny  of  the 
nation.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  insistently  maintained 
that  what  was  taking  place  in  France  had  always  charac- 
terized highly  civilized  people  who  had  risen  to  better 


Stationary 
population 
in  France 


894  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

intelligence  and  standard  of  living;  and  that  in  France 
well-being  and  high  intelligence  were  so  universally  dif- 
fused, that  what  existed  only  among  the  upper  classes  else- 
where prevailed  generally  in  France  among  the  people. 

Germany  The  recovery  of  France  was  beset  with  diflficulties  that 

and  France  seemed  very  disheartening  at  the  time.  Not  only  did  she 
have  to  pay  the  indenmity,  and  repair  the  losses  caused  by 
her  defeat,  but  when  once  the  money  had  been  paid  to 
Germany  and  recovery  was  going  well  forward,  she  was 
watched  with  jealous  suspicion  by  the  Germans,  who, 
having  overthrown  and  plundered  her,  wished  her  to  re- 
main weak  and  friendless,  so  that  she  could  not  possibly 
take  vengeance.  At  first  the  French,  smarting  under  their 
humiliation  and  the  sense  of  their  wrongs,  declared  openly 
that  they  would  have  revenge  as  soon  as  they  could.  Bis- 
marck and  his  military  colleagues  had  believed  that  the 
terms  of  the  treaty  were  such  that  France  would  remain 
weak  for  some  time;  but  when  the  indemnity  was  paid  off 
sooner  than  had  been  considered  possible,  the  French 
people  went  onward  in  marvelously  swift  recuperation. 
The  Germans  did  not  doubt  that  they  could  defeat  France 
again,  but  some  of  the  leaders  taught  that  if  there  must  be 
another  war  it  would  be  easier  and  wiser  to  strike  the 
enemy  down  before  full  strength  was  recovered. 

The   Affair  In  this  manner  arose  the  once-renowned  Affair  of  1875. 

of  1875  France  had  adopted  the  Prussian  system  of  universal  mili- 

tary training,  and  in  that  year  passed  a  law  to  complete  the 
\  reorganization  of  her  army.     What  followed  is  still  en- 

veloped in  obscurity,  but  it  would  seem  that  German 
leaders  beheved  it  would  be  well  to  strike  before  the  new 
law  produced  its  effects,  and  that  Bismarck  desired  to 
impose  a  new  treaty  by  which  France  would  not  be  per- 
mitted to  maintain  a  large  army.  There  was  a  great  war 
scare,  and  the  French  feared  they  were  about  to  be  at- 
tacked. If  such  was  the  German  intention,  it  speedily 
brought  from  Russia  and  from  Great  Britain  intimation 


THE  DUAL  ALLIANCE 


395 


that  they  would  not  this  time  stand  aside  and  see  France 
first  attacked  and  then  crushed;  and  the  crisis  soon  passed. 
France  now  passed  definitely  out  of  her  position  of  hopeless 
inferiority,  and  gained  steadily  in  strength  and  assurance. 

But  however  swift  and  splendid  her  recovery  was,  it 
came  too  late  to  enable  her  to  settle  her  account  with  the 
Germans.  As  the  years  passed  France  grew  stronger  and 
greater  than  before,  but  meanwhile  Germany  was  growing 
more  rapidly  still  in  population,  wealth,  and  military  power. 
Furthermore,  the  German  Empire  was  the  center  and  head 
of  the  greatest  military  alliance  in  the  world,  and  all 
through  Bismarck's  time  France  remained  in  isolation. 
But  as  time  went  on  Russia  drew  away  from  Germany 
and  it  seemed  to  Frenchmen  that  their  chance  might  some 
day  come  if  Germany  were  involved  in  war  with  Russia  or 
if  Russia  formed  an  alliance  with  France.  In  1887  rela- 
tions between  the  two  countries  were  strained  as  a  result 
of  Boulanger's  activities,  and  also  because  of  the  arrest 
by  the  German  government  of  M.  Schnaebele,  a  French 
oflScial,  near  the  frontier.  During  the  crisis  Russia  moved 
troops  toward  the  German  border,  showing  clearly  her 
attitude  toward  Germany  and  France.  Bismarck  speak- 
ing in  the  Reichstag  had  said  that  if  France  again  at- 
tacked Germany  "we  should  endeavor  to  make  France 
incapable  of  attacking  us  for  thirty  years  .  .  .  each 
would  seek  to  bleed  the  other  white."  But  Schnaebele 
was  released,  and  Boulanger's  efforts  came  to  nothing. 

With  the  passing  of  Bismarck  and  the  beginning  of  a  new 
policy  by  William  II,  a  great  change  came  swiftly  to  pass: 
Russia  and  France  drew  together  in  the  Dual  Alliance. 
There  had  been  obstacles  enough  in  the  way  without  the 
skilful  manipulation  of  Bismarck.  Napoleon  I  had  in- 
vaded Russia  and  brought  about  the  burning  of  Moscow, 
and  Napoleon  III  had  been  the  leader  of  the  combination 
which  crushed  Russia  in  the  Crimean  War.  On  the  other 
hand  Frenchmen  remembered  the  terrible  retreat  of  the 


The 

SchnaebeI6 

affair 


The  entente 
between 
Russia  and 
France 


396 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

Military 
Convention 
of  1892-3 


Result  of 
the    alliance 


Grand  Army  in  1812,  and  they  had  recently  seen  Russia 
the  firm  friend  of  Prussia  while  they  were  being  trampled 
in  the  dust.  Moreover  Frenchmen  had  been  the  leaders 
in  political  reform  in  Europe,  and  now  constituted  the 
largest  body  of  self-governing  freemen  on  the  Continent; 
while  in  Russia,  conservative  autocrats  ruled  a  people  in 
lowly  condition.  But  the  mere  fact  that  they  were  sep- 
arated and  some  distance  apart  served  to  remove  evil 
causes  of  friction.  Now  they  were  both  isolated  as  a  result 
of  German  statecraft,  France  in  the  west,  Russia  in  the 
east;  they  both  needed  allies;  both  felt  insecure  without 
the  support  of  some  powerful  friend;  and  Russia  badly 
needed  money  for  internal  development,  which  could  be 
obtained  in  France  better  than  anywhere  else.  These 
causes  operated  swiftly,  once  the  influence  of  Bismarck 
was  removed.  Even  before  his  fall  the  Russian  govern- 
ment, which  had  previously  borrowed  in  Germany,  began 
placing  huge  loans  in  France  and  seeking  an  agreement. 
Negotiations  and  friendly  visits  began  in  1890.  Then  in 
1892  the  two  powers  entered  into  an  entente  or  friendly 
understanding,  and  in  the  next  year  a  military  convention 
was  arranged.  It  was  believed  then  and  for  a  long  time 
afterward  that  a  treaty  of  alliance  had  been  signed,  but  in 
1918  the  publication  of  a  French  Yellow  Book  made  it  plain 
that  no  treaty  had  been  signed,  and  that  what  had  long 
popularly  been  designated  as  the  Dual  Alliance  rested  upon 
the  entente  and  the  Military  Convention  of  1892-3.  The 
agreement  stipulated  that  in  case  one  of  the  parties  to  the 
treaty  was  attacked  by  Germany,  the  other  would  stand 
by  its  partner  with  all  of  its  power. 

The  result  of  the  Dual  Alliance  of  1893  was  in  some 
sense  to  restore  the  balance  of  power  in  Europe,  to  take 
France  out  of  her  position  of  loneliness  and  inferiority,  and 
to  shake  the  hegemony  of  the  German  Empire.  But 
actually  it  did  little  beyond  making  France  feel  more  se- 
cure.   The  Triple  Alliance  was  believed  by  competent 


THE  DUAL  ALLIANCE 


397 


observers  to  be  stronger  than  its  rival,  and  France  and 
Russia  were,  moreover,  in  active  rivalry  with  Great  Bri- 
tain. Therefore,  after  1893,  as  before,  France  found  that 
it  was  hopeless  to  think  of  attacking  Germany  to  get  back 
the  lost  provinces  and  restore  her  position;  and  in  course 
of  time  desire  and  expectation  of  doing  this  so  far  died 
out  that  they  cannot  be  reckoned  as  important  causes  of 
the  war  of  1914. 

During  the  generation  after  the  Franco-Prussian  War 
France  came  into  dangerous  and  increasing  rivalry  with 
Great  Britain.  This  resulted  from  colonial  expansion  and 
the  naval  expansion  which  went  with  it.  Once  her  recov- 
ery was  well  begun,  France  turned  her  eyes  beyond  Europe 
with  the  purpose  of  building  up  a  new  colonial  empire  and 
retrieving  abroad  her  losses.  She  had  great  success  in 
north  Africa,  in  southeastern  Asia,  and  in  some  of  the  is- 
lands, especially  Madagascar;  and  it  was  no  long  time  be- 
fore she  had  built  up  the  second  largest  colonial  empire  in 
the  world.  Along  with  this  went  naval  expansion,  which 
awakened  the  ever-watchful  jealousy  of  Britain,  particu- 
larly after  the  formation  of  the  Dual  Alliance,  for 
England  was  apprehensive  of  Russian  expansion  in  Asia 
down  toward  India,  just  as  she  was  of  French  naval  in- 
crease and  French  expansion  in  north  Africa  toward  the 
Nile.  Great  tension  and  much  hostility  developed  year 
by  year,  and  in  the  latter  part  of  the  century  the  situation 
seemed  fraught  with  the  ominous  possibilities  of  conflict 
which  a  decade  later  made  so  dangerous  the  relations  be- 
tween Germany  and  England.  The  crisis  came  in  1898, 
when  British  forces,  which  had  moved  up  from  Egypt 
and  just  conquered  the  Sudan,  came  in  contact  with 
French  forces  which  had  moved  eastward  across  Africa  to 
Fashoda  on  the  upper  Nile.  England  demanded  that 
France  withdraw,  and  this  was  at  first  refused.  But  it 
was  as  hopeless  for  France  to  contend  with  the  over- 
whelming sea  power  of  Britain  as  it  was  for  her  to  contest 


France 

Great 

Britain 


and 


398  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

with  Germany  on  the  Rhine,  and  so  she  yielded  com- 
pletely. The  episode  left  great  bitterness  in  the  hearts  of 
Frenchmen.  At  this  time  some  of  them  believed  that  they 
had  best  forget  the  recent  past  and  join  with  Germany 
against  England,  their  traditional  foe.  Until  this  time, 
however,  Germany  had  seemed  drawing  closer  and  closer 
to  England.  But  in  reality  a  turning  point  had  been 
reached.  Germany  and  England  were  to  begin  drawing 
apart  now  in  bitterest  rivalry,  which  would  one  day  lead 
to  war,  while  after  a  few  years  England  and  France  were 
to  enter  on  a  friendship  which  would  later  be  the  salvation 
of  them  both. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Greneral  accounts:  Gabriel  Hanotaux,  Histoire  de  la  France 
Contemporainey  4i  vols.  (1903-5),  trans,  by  J.  C.  Tarver,  Con- 
temporary  France,  4  vols.  (1903-9),  best,  covers  the  period  1870- 
1882;  the  most  recent  work  of  importance  is  Emile  Bourgeois, 
Modem  France,  2  vols.  (1919);  J.  C.  Bracq,  France  under  the 
Republic  (1910);  F.  Despagnet,  La  Diplomatic  de  la  Trodsieme 
RSpublique  et  le  Droit  des  Gens  (1904);  Frederick  Lawton,  The 
Third  Republic  (1909);  Emile  Simond,  Histoire  de  la  Troisieme 
RSpublique  de  1887  h  1894  (1913);  Edgar  Zevort,  Histoire  de  la 
Troisieme  RSpublique,  4  vols.  (2d  ed.  1898-1901),  covers  the 
period  1870-94. 

The  Commune:  Maxime  Du  Camp,  Les  Convulsions  de 
Paris,  4  vols.  (5th  ed.  1881),  conservative;  Edmond  Lepelletier, 
Histoire  de  la  Commune  de  1871,  2  vols.  (1911-12),  best. 

The  beginning  of  the  restoration  of  France :  Paul  Deschanel, 
Gambetta  (1919);  Jules  Simon,  Le  Gouvemement  de  M.  Thiers, 
8  FSwi&r  1871-24^  Mai  1873,  2  vols.  (1879),  trans.,  2  vols.  (1879) ; 
L.  A.  Thiers,  Notes  et  Souvenirs  de  M.  Thiers^  1870-1873  (1903), 
trans,  by  F.  M.  Atkinson  (1915);  E.  Zevort,  Thiers  (1892); 
J.  Valfrey,  Histoire  de  la  Diplomatic  du  Gouvernement  de  la  DS- 
fense  Nationale,  3  vols.  (1871-3),  Histoi/rt  du  TraitS  de  Francfort 
etdela  LibSration  du  Territoire,  2  vols.  (1874-5),  the  latter  con- 
tains valuable  materials  not  elsewhere  published. 

Church  and  State :  Aristide  Briand,  La  Separation  des  Eglises 
et  de  VEtat  (1905) ;  E.  Lecannet,  VEglise  de  France  sous  la  Trois- 


THE  DUAL  ALLIANCE 

ieme  Republiquey  2  vols.  (1907-10),  Catholic,  covers  the  period  to 
1894;  Paul  Sabatier,  A  Propos  de  la  Separation  des  Eglises  et  de 
VEtat  (4th  ed.  1906),  trans.  Disestablishment  in  France  (1906). 

The  Dreyfus  Affair:  Joseph  Reinach,  Histoire  de  V Affaire 
Dreyfus,  7  vols.     (1898-1911),  best,  sympathetic. 

The  Dual  Alliance:  the  all-important  source  is  Documents 
Diplomatiques,  V Alliance  Franco-Russe,  published  by  the 
French  government  (1918);  C.  de  S.  de  Freycinet,  Souvenirs, 
1878-93  (1913),  valuable,  by  one  of  the  principal  participants; 
V.  de  Gorloff,  Origines  et  Bases  de  V Alliance  Franco-Russe  (1913) ; 
J.  J.  Hansen,  V Alliance  Franco-Russe  (1897),  by  a  participant; 

A.  Tardieu,  La  France  ei  les  Alliances  (1904),  English  trans. 
(1908),  excellent. 

Foreign  politics:  H.  G.  de  Blowitz,  Memoirs  (1903);  G. 
Hanotaux,  Fachoda  (1909);  R.  Pinon,  VEmpire  de  la  Medi- 
terranee  (1904),  France  et  Allemagne,  1870-1913  (1913). 

Government  and  customs:    Raymond  Poincare,  trans,  by 

B.  Miall,  How  France  Is  Governed  (1914),  excellent  brief  treatise; 
Barrett  Wendell,  The  France  of  To-day  (1907). 


CHAPTER  V 
DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN 

Methinks  I  see  in  my  mind  a  noble  and  puissant  nation  rousing  her- 
self like  a  strong  man  after  sleep,  and  shaking  her  invincible  locks; 
methinks  I  see  her  as  an  eagle  mewing  her  mighty  youth,  and  kind- 
ling her  undazzled  eyes  at  the  full  midday  beam.     .     .     . 
Milton,  Areopagitica  (1644). 

There  is  no  country  so  interested  in  the  maintenance  of  peace  as  Eng- 
land. .  .  .  She  is  not  an  aggressive  Power,  for  there  is  nothing 
that  she  desires.  .  .  .  What  she  wishes  is  to  maintain  and  to 
enjoy  the  unexampled  Empire  which  she  has  built  up,  and  which 
it  is  her  pride  to  remember  exists  as  much  upon  sympathy  as  upon 
force. 
Speech  of  the  Earl  of  Beaconsfield  at  the  Lord  Mayor's 
Banquet,  London  Times,  November  10,  1876. 

The  history  of  Great  Britain  in  the  later  period  has  to 
do  largely  with  the  magnificent  growth  of  the  British  Em- 
pire. In  most  respects  it  is  a  record  of  prosperity  and 
power.  But  it  is  also  a  story  of  increasing  control  of  gov- 
ernment by  the  people,  until  at  last  the  British  have  be- 
^  come  one  of  the  most  democratic  nations  in  the  world. 

The  Repre-  By  the  Electoral  Reform  Law  of  1867  only  a  part  of  the 
sentation  of  lower  class  was  allowed  to  vote,  but  seventeen  years  later 
Ar^  iftftA^  the  franchise  was  extended  also  to  the  agricultural  workers 
and  the  laborers  in  the  mines.  By  this  reform  law  of  1884 
two  million  men  were  added  to  the  electorate,  so  that 
five  million  persons  had  the  franchise,  or  one  out  of 
every  seven  of  the  population.  Manhood  suffrage  was  not 
yet  established,  as  it  had  been  in  France  and  in  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  though  actually  almost  every  man  was  now 

400 


Act,  1884 


DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN 


401 


allowed  to  vote,  and  the  representatives  elected  by  them 
to  the  House  of  Commons  held  the  principal  powers  of  the 
government  and  directly  controlled  the  excutive  organ  of 
the  state.  Meanwhile,  the  year  before,  a  Corrupt  Prac- 
tices Act  limited  the  amount  of  money  which  a  candidate 
might  spend  for  election,  and  provided  such  severe  penal- 
ties for  bribery  and  corruption  as  to  bring  them  virtually 
to  an  end  in  Great  Britain.  The  year  after  the  Electoral 
Reform  Law,  the  Redistribution  Act  of  1885,  practically 
divided  Great  Britain  into  electoral  districts,  bringing 
representation  into  accord  with  population.  Previously 
representation  had  been  by  counties  and  by  boroughs. 
Now  the  small  boroughs  were  merged  into  their  counties, 
most  of  the  larger  ones  were  made  one-member  constituen- 
cies, the  counties  were  divided  into  one-member  con- 
stituencies on  the  basis  of  the  population  within  them,  and 
the  larger  cities  were  given  representation  in  accordance 
with  the  number  of  their  inhabitants. 

This  extension  of  the  electorate  in  England  was  accom- 
panied by  persistent  demand  that  women  be  admitted 
to  share  in  the  government.  The  women's  movement  in 
Great  Britain,  as  in  the  United  States,  went  on  for  a  con- 
siderable time  before  it  got  much  attention.  During  the 
Puritan  Revolution,  and  also  in  France  during  the  French 
Revolution,  women  had  demanded  their  "rights"  as 
equals  with  men.  Nevertheless,  the  feminist  movement 
is  essentially  a  thing  of  the  nineteenth  century,  following 
the  effects  of  the  French  Revolution,  and  more  particu- 
larly of  the  Industrial  Revolution.  In  New  Jersey,  one 
of  the  American  states,  in  the  period  1797-1807,  women 
were  permitted  to  vote;  but  this  was  an  isolated  case,  and 
in  both  of  the  great  English-speaking  countries  during  the 
first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  advocates  of 
woman's  suffrage,  principally  Quakers,  were  considered  to 
be  proposing  something  impracticable  and  immoral,  and 
contrary  to  the  laws  of  God.     But  in  England  especially. 


Representa- 
tion re- 
formed, 1885 


The 

women's 

movement 


402 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

woman's 
suffrage 
movement 


Progress 
of  the 
movement 


where  the  Industrial  Revolution  first  made  such  great 
headway,  conditions  changed  profoundly,  and  with  them 
the  position  of  women,  so  that  it  was  no  longer  possible 
to  apply  the  old  arguments  with  as  much  effect  as  before. 
Formerly  woman's  place  had  been  the  home,  and  it  was 
supposed  that  almost  all  would  marry;  but  now  a  great 
number  worked  in  factories,  and  more  and  more  men  emi- 
grated to  the  colonies  of  the  empire.  By  the  middle  of 
the  nineteenth  century  there  were  365,000  more  women 
than  men  in  England,  and  over  a  million  more  in  1900. 
It  was  obviously  impossible  for  a  large  number  of  these 
women  to  marry,  and  it  was  evident  that  many  were  sup- 
porting themselves.  Often  they  were  paying  taxes,  with- 
out voice  in  the  government,  or  control  over  those  who 
made  the  laws.  At  the  same  time  women  were  steadily 
having  their  minds  broadened  by  more  education  than 
women  had  ever  had  before;  they  were  developing  a 
stronger  feeling  of  individuality,  and  greater  sense  of  their 
dignity  and  power.  It  seemed  to  them  that  the  doctrines 
established  by  their  forefathers,  and  proclaimed  so  grandly 
during  the  French  Revolution,  applied  to  women  as  well 
as  to  men. 

For  a  long  time  both  in  England  and  the  United  States, 
they  got  some  ridicule  but  not  much  attention.  Most  of 
the  women,  conservative  and  timid,  had  no  interest  in  the 
movement,  and  most  men  were  opposed  to  it  because  it 
ran  counter  to  a  vast  mass  of  old  custom  and  established 
ideas.  But  in  1866  John  Stuart  Mill  moved  in  the  House 
of  Commons  to  include  women  in  the  provisions  of  the  bill 
then  pending  to  extend  the  franchise.  His  proposal  was 
easily  defeated,  but  thereafter  almost  every  year  a  bill  was 
proposed  for  the  enfranchisement  of  women. 

After  a  while  women  in  England  were  allowed  to  vote, 
and  be  voted  for  in  local  elections,  and  it  was  generally 
believed  that  they  had  a  higher  position  than  the  women 
of  any  other  country  except,  probably,  the  United  States. 


V 


DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN  40S 

One  by  one,  the  old  legal  inequalities  were  abolished,  until 
scarcely  any  of  them  remained,  and  women's  economic 
opportunities  became  constantly  better.  Nevertheless 
they  were  still  subject  to  some  discriminations,  and  con- 
stantly a  larger  number  of  them,  who  desired  complete 
equality  with  men,  believed  that  this  could  never  be  at- 
tained; nor  could  women  take  their  proper  part  in  the 
commonwealth  until  they  were  admitted  to  vote  for  mem- 
bers of  parliament  upon  the  same  conditions  as  men. 

The  movement  continued  to  make  slow  but  certain  _  2. 
progress,  though  the  majority  of  the  people,  both  men  and 
women,  continued  against  it.  Finally,  about  1905,  a  small 
number  of  more  radical  women,  under  the  leadership  of 
Mrs.  Emmeline  Pankhurst,  tiring  at  impediments  and 
delay,  at  lack  of  public  interest  and  attention,  undertook 
to  get  votes  for  women  by  force  and  compulsion,  which, 
they  said,  was  the  method  that  men  had  employed. 
Then  for  a  few  years  "wild  women,"  as  they  were  called, 
screamed  and  interrupted  public  meetings,  harassed  public 
officials,  tried  to  interfere  with  the  carrying  on  of  the  gov- 
ernment in  which  they  had  no  part,  and  perpetrated  all 
sorts  of  violence  and  outrage.  When  arrested  and  im- 
prisoned they  tried  the  "hunger  strike,"  previously 
employed  by  political  prisoners  in  Russia,  starving  them- 
selves so  that  the  government,  which  desired  that  no 
woman  should  be  killed  in  this  contest,  always  released 
them.  These  suffragettes  did  get  a  large  amount  of  atten- 
tion for  their  cause,  but  they  aroused  great  hostility  and 
dislike.  Moreover,  they  had  set  the  dangerous  precedent 
of  women  employing  force,  when  the  whole  tendency  of 
civilization  had  been  for  force  not  to  be  employed  against 
women.  But  when  the  war  began  in  1914,  they  imme- 
diately ceased  their  campaign  and  rallied  to  the  support 
of  the  country.  The  women  now  performed  indispensable 
and  tremendous  service,  and  it  was  generally  recognized 
that  the  suffrage  should  be  given  if  they  desired  it. 


suffragettes 


404 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Extension 
of  the 
franchise, 
1918 


Improve- 
ment of 
education 


The  great  expansion  of  democratic  feeling  during  the 
war  led  to  further  extending  of  the  suffrage.  In  1918  all 
men  over  twenty-one  with  fixed  residence  or  business 
premises  for  six  months,  all  women  over  thirty  years  of 
age  already  entitled  to  vote  in  local  elections,  and  women 
whose  husbands  were  so  entitled,  were  given  the  parlia- 
mentary franchise.  The  electorate  was  thus  increased  by 
two  million  more  men  and  six  million  women,  so  that  now 
one  out  of  every  three  of  the  entire  population  could  vote. 
The  government  of  the  United  Kingdom  had  been  put  into 
the  hands  of  its  people  about  as  far  as  was  possible  under 
the  existing  system,  and  the  people  had  more  complete 
control  and  were  able  to  make  their  wishes  felt  more  im- 
mediately and  directly  than  any  other  great  nation  in  the 
world. 

With  the  extension  of  the  franchise  in  1867  Robert  Lowe 
had  said:  "We  must  now  educate  our  masters."  This  was 
soon  undertaken,  and  a  great  change  was  made  in  1870. 
Down  to  this  time  English  education,  except  for  a  very  few 
of  the  wealthy,  was  far  behind  what  existed  in  Germany 
or  the  United  States.  There  were  the  two  old  universities 
of  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  unrivalled  in  beauty  and  ancient 
charm,  but  giving  only  the  culture  which  befitted  the  child- 
ren of  the  ruling  classes.  Beneath  them  were  certain 
"public  schools"  like  Eton  and  Rugby,  where  also  the  sons 
of  the  aristocrats  might  get  splendid  teaching  of  the  hu- 
manities and  fine  training  in  the  development  of  character. 
But  this  was  by  far  the  best  part  of  a  system  which  had 
been  devised  principally  for  the  upper  classes.  In  1870 
there  were  thought  to  be  about  four  million  children  of 
school  age,  of  whom  only  half  attended  any  school.  Of  these 
two  million,  half  attended  schools  poorly  organized  and 
often  not  well  conducted,  while  the  rest  went  to  schools  un- 
der government  inspection  and  partly  supported  by  it,  but 
managed  by  the  Church  of  England,  so  that  in  England  as 
in  France  and  in  Spain,  a  considerable  part  of  the  education 


Jtrvit  I. Or.) 

'»,T/"-)  .^^„T,„'vfri>  :,M.,pu„..h. 

^mo^  Of  5«,i^  ,.  .: '.  '^•/s*-  _     Tuirootu  or 

Low  ArchipoUgo 


;ta?^r  Socirty  I,. 


TTongi  Of       .   Cook  Tj  '      "    4" -• 


t  tnamtffl  ta: 


Ooujheriy  f. 


(fr.)  BrHish  Efflpin 
Mwm.  omrniic  co  mc».r. . 


17.    THE 


DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN 


405 


remained  in  the  hands  of  the  Church.  Some  believed  that 
it  was  well  for  religious  teaching  to  be  given;  others  that 
education  ought  to  be  entirely  without  religious  influence, 
and  compulsory  and  free.  The  Education  Act  of  1870 
was  a  compromise,  as  has  usually  been  the  case  in  England. 
Existing  voluntary  schools  doing  good  work  were  to  be 
retained  and  get  more  assistance  from  the  government, 
and  might  continue  their  religious  instruction.  Elsewhere 
"board  schools"  were  to  be  established,  supported  by  the 
government,  by  the  local  rates  (taxes),  and  partly  by  fees 
paid  by  the  parents  of  the  children  attending;  in  them  no 
religious  denominational  instruction  was  to  be  allowed. 
This  reform  by  no  means  brought  the  educational  system 
of  Great  Britain  up  to  the  standards  of  Switzerland  and 
the  German  Empire;  it  did  not  make  education  entirely 
free  and  compulsory,  and  it  left  it  partly  under  denomina- 
tional control.  None  the  less  it  greatly  bettered  condi- 
tions, and  before  the  end  of  the  century  four  fifths  of  the 
children  went  to  school.  The  work  was  completed  in  1918 
by  one  of  the  great  reforms  of  the  period  of  the  war,  when 
a  law  was  passed  providing  that  all  children  between  five 
and  fourteen  years  must  go  to  school,  and  providing  that 
the  expense  of  education  should  be  divided  equally  between 
the  central  government  and  the  local  authorities. 

The  admission  of  the  lower  classes  to  the  electorate  and 
to  a  share  in  the  government  in  1867  and  1884  was  not  fol- 
lowed by  an  overturning  of  the  government,  such  as  the 
upper  classes  had  feared,  nor  by  any  exceedingly  radical 
demands.  Nevertheless,  as  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  cen- 
tury, a  whole  series  of  reforms  was  gradually  carried  out. 
The  Liberals  believed  they  ought  to  be  made;  the  Conser- 
vatives considered  it  better  for  the  government  to  grant 
them  than  for  the  mass  of  the  people  to  compel  them. 
In  1870  the  civil  service  was  reformed.  Next  year  the 
University  Tests  Act  practically  completed  the  removal 
of  the  religious  tests  which  before  had  restricted  the  priv- 


Social    and 

economic 

reforms 


406  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

ileges  of  the  great  universities  mostly  to  members  of  the 
Church  of  England.  In  the  period  1878  to  1901  factory 
legislation  was  extended  and  simplified,  and  during  the 
same  time  laws  were  passed  to  better  regulate  the  condi- 
tions in  the  mines.  The  state  socialism  of  Bismarck  had 
put  the  German  Empire  ahead  of  other  countries  for  a 
while  in  the  improvement  of  social  and  economic  condi- 
tions, but  similar  work  was  undertaken  also  in  the  United 
Kingdom  when  the  Liberal  Party  came  into  power  under 
Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman,  Mr.  Asquith,  and 
Mr.  Lloyd  George  in  1905.  In  the  course  of  the  years  im- 
mediately following,  the  Workingmen's  Compensation  Act 
(1906)  made  employers  liable  to  pay  compensation  to  em- 
ployees injured  by  accident.  The  Old  Age  Pension  Act 
(1909)  provided  that  every  person  over  seventy  years  of  age 
with  an  annual  income  of  less  than  £31  10s.  should  receive 
a  pension  from  the  state.  Long  effort  had  been  needed 
to  secure  this  law,  since  while  its  advocates  asserted  that 
it  would  make  happier  the  last  years  of  deserving  unfor- 
tunates, opponents  declared  that  all  such  legislation  was 
ruinous  since  it  tended  to  make  people  rely  on  assistance 
from  the  state  rather  than  on  their  own  efforts.  In  1911 
the  National  Insurance  Act  provided  insurance  for  sickness 
and  loss  of  employment,  the  funds  to  be  subscribed  gener- 
ally, though  not  always,  by  the  employees,  the  employers, 
and  the  state. 
Trade  Beginning  with  1824  a  series  of  statutes,  especially  the 

unions^  great  statute  of  1871,  gradually  legalized  trades  unions, 

which  workingmen  had  already  formed,  but  which  the 
state  long  continued  to  oppose.  In  1901,  the  House 
of  Lords  declared  in  the  Toff -Vale  Case  that  members  of 
trades  unions  were  liable  singly  and  collectively  for  the 
acts  of  their  union,  thus  adding  corporate  responsibility  to 
the  corporate  privileges  which  unions  had  acquired;  but 
five  years  later  the  Trades  Dispute  Act  gave  immunity  to 
trade-union  funds.     Actually  trades  unions  were  becoming 


DEMOCRATIC  BRI'TAIN 


407 


exceedingly  powerful  in  Great  Britain.  More  and  more 
they  were  able  to  deal  as  equals  or  superiors  with  the  em- 
ployers and  make  the  government  itself  heed  their  wishes. 
Memories  of  long  oppression  and  tyranny  on  the  part  of 
capitalists  and  employers  caused  many  leaders  of  the 
workingmen  to  regard  all  employers  with  dislike  and  sus- 
picion; and  gradually  they  adopted  socialist  ideas  and 
began  to  hope  that  a  day  might  come  when  capitalism  and 
middle-class  employers  would  be  done  away  with  com- 
pletely. Numerous  strikes  were  called,  it  sometimes 
seemed,  more  for  the  purpose  of  harassing  the  employers 
than  anything  else.  The  doctrine  spread  that  working- 
men  were  made  to  labor  too  many  hours  for  the  benefit  of 
employers,  that  thus  numerous  people  could  find  no  work 
to  do,  and  that  if  hours  were  short  and  production  re- 
stricted there  would  be  work  enough  for  them  all. 

As  Britain  became  a  completely  industrialized  country, 
with  its  artirans  composing  so  great  a  portion  of  the 
people,  leaders  aspired  to  get  control  of  the  government 
some  day  for  organized  labor.  In  1893  an  Independent 
Labor  Party  was  founded,  which  proposed  to  have  the 
government  bring  about  an  eight-hour  day  of  labor,  col- 
lective ownership,  and  state  control  of  railways,  shipping, 
and  banks.  Most  of  the  British  laborers  were  not  yet 
ready  to  accept  socialist  doctrines,  and  so  they  did  not  give 
support.  Another  Labor  Party,  founded  in  1906,  became 
one  of  the  smaller  groups  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Its 
power  increased  as  time  went  on,  its  advocates  expecting 
it  to  be  the  dominant  party  in  the  future. 

Labor  disputes  became  constantly  more  bitter  and 
labor  leaders  more  aggressive  in  the  years  just  before  the 
war.  It  was  often  believed  that  the  numerous  harassing 
strikes  and  refusal  to  work  more  than  a  certain  amount 
were  seriously  hindering  production  and  putting  Britain 
behind  in  industrial  competition  with  Germany  and  the 
United  States.    During  the  Great  War  British  labor  gave 


Employees 

and 

employers 


The   Labor 
Party 


Labor 
powerful 
and 
aggressive 


408 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  Report 
of  the  Labor 
Committee 


PoTerty 


splendid  response  to  the  needs  of  the  country,  the  unions 
consenting  to  put  aside  their  rules.  But  it  was  evident 
that  they  expected  reward  to  come  after  their  country 
had  triumphed.  Some  of  them  declared  that  then  the 
state  must  take  over  the  mines  and  the  railways  and  other 
great  instruments  and  sources  of  production  to  be  used  for 
the  people.  In  1917  the  British  Labor  Committee  issued 
a  report  in  which  it  declared  that  there  must  be  democra- 
tic control  of  all  the  machinery  of  the  state,  and  that  the 
system  of  private  capitalists  must  yield  to  common  owner- 
ship of  land  and  capital  by  the  people.  At  the  end  of  the 
struggle  the  powerful  "Triple  Alliance"  of  miners,  trans- 
port workers,  and  railwaymen  was  strengthened,  and  the 
organized  laborers  of  the  country  drew  up  in  powerful  ar- 
ray threatening  to  enforce  their  wishes  by  **  direct  action  " 
of  paralyzing  strikes. 

Social  betterment  had  lagged  far  behind  the  wishes  of 
enlightened  leaders  like  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  and  the  desires 
of  the  socialist  and  radical  teachers.  The  condition  of  a 
great  part  of  the  people  seemed  far  less  good  than  that  of 
the  Germans,  protected  by  their  paternal  government,  or 
of  the  inhabitants  of  the  United  States  and  some  of  the 
British  dominions,  where  new  lands  were  being  opened  up 
and  great  natural  resources  made  use  of.  The  evils  of 
industrialism  had  by  no  means  disappeared.  For  its  size 
Britain  was  the  wealthiest  country  in  the  world,  but  this 
wealth  was  largely  concentrated  in  the  hands  of  a  few. 
It  was  estimated  that  half  the  national  income  went  to 
12  per  cent,  of  the  population,  that  all  the  rest  of  the 
people  were  poor,  and  that  in  some  communities  a  third  of 
them  were  always  on  the  verge  of  starvation.  Before  1914 
travellers  were  struck  by  the  appalling  misery  of  the  slums 
of  Glasgow  and  the  dreadful  poverty  of  wide  areas  about 
the  Whitechapel  district  in  London.  To  some  extent  it 
was  against  such  conditions  that  the  British  trades  unions 
were  struggling;  and  their  ignorant,  obstinate,  and  ar- 


DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN 


409 


bitrary  methods  were  often  to  be  explained  and  excused 
because  of  the  ancient  and  terrible  evils  which  they  con- 
fronted. 

Most  of  the  land  had  long  since  come  into  the  possession 
of  a  few  great  owners.  In  England  two  thirds  of  the  soil 
was  owned  by  10,000  persons,  and  almost  all  of  Scotland 
by  1,700  persons;  many  of  the  large  estates  being  entailed, 
so  that  they  could  not  easily  be  alienated  or  divided,  and 
so  that  they  passed  intact  from  one  generation  to  another. 
To  a  considerable  extent  Britain  was  a  country  of  beautiful 
parks  and  estates,  with  picturesque  old  villages  delightful 
to  the  tourist's  eye,  though  often  antiquated,  unsanitary, 
and  not  sufficient  for  the  needs  of  the  rural  population. 
The  agricultural  laborers  were  crowded  off  the  land,  or 
else  entirely  at  the  mercy  of  powerful  landowners.  At  the 
other  extreme  were  the  great  landed  proprietors,  with 
large  fortunes  and  extensive  investments,  taxed  lightly  on 
their  lands,  wealthy,  powerful,  constituting — far  more  than 
in  France,  and  as  much  as  in  Germany — an  aristocratic 
caste  above  the  other  inhabitants.  They  completely 
dominated  fashionable  and  social  life,  they  filled  many  of 
the  important  places  in  the  government,  and  some  of  them 
composed  the  House  of  Lords.  Generally  they  had  been 
wise  and  careful,  and  had  contributed  not  a  little  to  the 
welfare  of  the  country,  and  it  was  for  this  reason  that  they 
continued  to  retain  so  much  of  their  position  and  power. 
But  many  Englishmen  had  long  thought  it  a  misfortune 
that  their  agriculture  should  so  far  decline  and  their  rural 
population  diminish;  there  had  long  been  agitation, 
which  increased  during  the  war,  for  the  government  in 
some  way  to  compel  the  breaking  up  of  the  great  estates 
and  to  settle  part  of  the  population  upon  them. 

For  the  increased  expenses  of  the  government  caused 
by  the  social  legislation  which  was  being  carried  through, 
more  money  was  needed,  and  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  chan- 
cellor of  the  exchequer,  now  proposed  to  increase  the 


Aristocracy 
and  great 
estates 


The  House 
of  Lords 
and  the 
budget 


410 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  House 
of  Lords 
and  the 
House  of 
Commons 


budget  partly  by  increased  income  taxes  and  also  by  heavy 
taxation  on  the  unearned  increment  of  land  values,  that  is, 
where  the  value  of  unoccupied  or  unimproved  land  was 
increased  not  through  anything  done  by  the  owner  but  by 
the  mere  increase  in  population  or  surrounding  values. 
Thus  he  proposed  to  get  the  larger  amounts  of  money 
needed  by  higher  taxes  on  the  possessions  of  the  wealthy, 
but  his  scheme  was  denounced  as  striking  at  the  very  se- 
curity of  property,  and  when  the  provision  passed  the 
House  of  Commons  at  the  end  of  1909  it  was  at  once  re- 
jected by  the  Lords. 

Parliament  was  now  dissolved,  and  a  new  election  held 
in  which  the  great  issue  before  the  country  was  the  "veto 
power"  of  the  upper  house.  Parliament  had  long  been  a 
body  of  two  houses,  whose  principal  business  was  the  pass- 
ing of  laws  and  the  appropriation  of  money.  In  the  pass- 
ing of  bills  it  was  necessary  that  both  houses  give  their 
consent,  nor  could  a  bill  become  law  if  either  the  Lords  or 
the  Commons  refused.  During  the  eighteenth  century 
the  principle  had  been  equally  well  established  that  bills 
for  the  appropriation  of  money  were  to  originate  in  the 
Commons  and  not  to  be  altered  by  the  Lords.  In  other 
respects,  however,  the  House  of  Lords  continued  to  have 
the  veto  power  and  used  it  not  infrequently.  On  several 
important  occasions  there  had  been  bitter  disputes  between 
the  two  houses,  and  on  two  memorable  occasions — when 
new  peers  were  created,  in  1711,  to  get  the  approval  of  a 
majority  of  the  Lords  for  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht,  and  in 
1832,  when  new  creations  were  threatened  to  pass  the 
electoral  reform  law  through  the  upper  House — the  govern- 
ment had  employed  a  special  device  to  overcome  the  Lords' 
veto.  Now  in  1910,  after  the  Lords  had  rejected  the 
Finance  Bill,  parliament  was  dissolved  and  elections  held 
on  the  issue  of  abolishing  altogether  the  veto  power  of  the 
Lords.  The  Liberals  won  and  brought  forward  such  a  bill, 
which  the  Lords  rejected.    Again  parliament  was  dissolved 


DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN 


411 


and  the  issue  bitterly  contested  in  general  elections,  and 
again  the  Liberals  triumphed.  Early  in  1911  it  was  an- 
nounced that  a  sufficient  number  of  new  peers  would  be 
created  to  carry  the  bill.  Then  the  House  of  Lords  yielded 
and  the  bill  was  enacted  into  law. 

This  Parliament  Law  of  1911  provided  that  the  Lords 
should  have  no  power  whatever  to  reject  any  money  bill, 
and  that  any  other  measure  passing  the  Commons  in  three 
successive  sessions  in  a  period  of  not  less  than  two  years 
should  become  law  despite  the  veto  of  the  Lords.  Thus 
was  the  constitution  of  parliament  fundamentally  altered. 
For  a  long  time  the  Lords  had  been  more  powerful  and  im- 
portant than  the  Commons,  but  since  the  eighteenth 
century  the  Commons  had  been  getting  an  ascendancy 
greater  and  greater.  None  the  less  the  Lords  might  still 
oppose  and  successfully  obstruct.  Now  substantially  this 
power  was  taken  away  from  them,  and  only  that  part  of 
parliament  which  was  elected  by  the  people  remained  with 
great  influence  in  the  state.  It  is  probable  that  the  upper 
House  of  the  English  parliament  will  be  reconstituted  on 
a  more  modern  basis.  At  present  its  power  is  far  less 
than  that  of  the  American  Senate,  which,  since  1913,  has 
been  made  directly  dependent  on  the  people.  As  of  old, 
legally  the  king  still  possessed  the  right  to  veto  a  bill,  but 
actually  no  sovereign  had  done  this  since  1707,  and  this 
prerogative  had  been  completely  lost.  In  1911  also  by 
this  same  law  the  maximum  duration  of  a  parliament  was 
fixed  at  five  years,  instead  of  seven,  as  previously  since 
1716.  In  the  same  year  the  Commons  voted  to  pay  their 
members,  something  once  done,  but  long  discontinued. 

Meanwhile  earnest  efforts  were  being  made  to  settle  the 
Irish  question,  and  it  began  to  seem  that  at  last  success  was 
nearly  at  hand.  During  much  of  the  nineteenth  century 
Ireland  had  been  governed  by  coercion  acts  and  military 
rule,  against  which  the  secret  societies  retaliated  again  and 
again  with  outrage,  destruction,  and  terror.     Bad  as  condi- 


The 

Parliament 
Law  of  1911 


The  Irish 
Question 


412  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

tions  in  Ireland  were,  they  had  arisen  not  from  any  special 
wickedness  of  Englishmen  but  as  a  result  of  methods 
which  were  everywhere  applied  in  times  past,  and  because 
of  circumstances  particularly  unhappy.  These  conditions 
were  changed  all  too  slowly.  But  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
nineteenth  century  a  great  alteration  came  to  pass.  Stead- 
ily the  people  of  Britain  had  become  more  sensitive  to 
wrong  and  the  suffering  about  them.  Moreover  Britain 
was  slowly  being  transformed  into  a  democracy,  with  the 
power  of  the  government  more  and  more  in  the  hands  of 
the  people.  And  just  as  in  the  nineteenth  century  a  great 
series  of  reforms  had  been  carried  out  to  better  the  lot  of 
the  mass  of  the  people  in  Britain,  so  after  a  while,  as  the 
British  people  and  their  leaders  understood  better  the 
conditions  in  Ireland,  they  turned  themselves  to  the  long 
and  diflScult  task  of  improving  them  and  undoing  the 
wrongs  once  committed. 
Reforms  Roman  Catholics  had  already  been  emancipated,  but 

the  removal  of  religious  discrimination  was  completed  in 
1869  by  the  disestablishment  of  the  Church  of  Ireland, 
which  was  the  Protestant  Church  long  before  established  by 
the  British  government  and  endowed  with  property,  and 
which  had  until  recently  been  supported  with  tithes  paid  by 
the  Catholic  Irish.  Next,  urged  on  by  violent  agitation  and 
the  savage  lawlessness  of  some  of  the  Irish,  the  government 
gave  its  attention  to  the  question  of  the  land.  Beginning 
with  1870  a  series  of  acts  was  passed  by  which  Irish  tenants 
were  protected  in  their  tenures;  their  right  was  established 
to  compensation  for  improvements  on  the  land  while 
it  was  in  their  possession;  and  presently  the  government 
itself  took  measures  to  see  that  they  were  not  made  to  pay 
excessive  rents.  More  important  still,  another  series  of 
laws,  passed  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  century,  gave  gov- 
ernment assistance  to  the  peasants  so  that  they  might  buy 
their  lands  and  become  owners  themselves,  they  repaying 
the  government,  with  moderate  interest,  in  small  payments 


DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN  413' 

over  a  long  period  of  time,  the  terms  being  so  generously 
arranged  that  presently  it  was  cheaper  for  an  Irishman  to 
buy  his  land  than  it  was  to  pay  rent.  By  1910  half  of 
the  island  was  in  possession  of  small  holders,  who  were 
slowly  paying  the  government;  and  it  was  evident  that 
in  the  course  of  time  Ireland  would  be  owned  by  peas- 
ant proprietors  more  than  almost  any  other  country. 
Further  progress  would  lie  in  setting  up  again,  if  modern 
conditions  permitted,  the  old  commerce  and  industry  of  ^^^ 
the  island.  ^-^^f^^"'^ 

Irishmen  were  far  from  being  satisfied,  however.  They  Home 
remained  discontented  with  the  government  which  made  ^"^® 
them  part  of  the  United  Kingdom.  Some  of  them  wished 
complete  independence  and  separation,  like  the  adherents 
of  Young  Ireland  who  arose  about  1840,  and  like  the  Fen- 
ians who  were  active  after  1860;  but  most  of  the  people 
followed  more  conservative  leaders.  About  1870  the 
Home  Rule  movement  began  under  Isaac  Butt,  and  was 
soon  carried  forward  by  Parnell.  This  was  designed  to 
secure  Irish  self-government  for  an  Ireland  which  would 
nevertheless  continue  in  the  United  Kingdom,  joined  with 
Great  Britain.  Most  of  the  people  in  Britain,  however, 
were  opposed  even  to  this  partial  separation.  Home  Rule 
was  advocated  by  the  Liberal  Party  under  Gladstone  in 
1886  and  in  1893,  but  both  times  the  bill  which  was  intro- 
duced into  parliament  failed  to  be  enacted  as  a  law.  For 
some  years  nothing  further  was  accomplished,  but  the  Irish 
under  their  new  leader,  John  Redmond,  continued  their 
efforts.  The  great  opportunity  came  when  the  Liberal 
Party  under  Asquith  and  Lloyd  George  were  trying  to 
bring  about  their  social  reforms.  The  Irish  Nationalist 
members  were  willing  to  vote  with  them  on  condition  that 
in  return  a  Home  Rule  law  should  be  passed.  The  Lib- 
erals were  the  more  willing  to  do  this  since  many  of  them 
favored  Irish  self-government.  Thus,  it  was  by  Irish 
support  that  the  Parliament  Act  of  1911  was  finally  put 


414 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Th«  Third 
Home  Rule 
Bill  passed, 
1914 


Ultttr 


Sinn  Fmin 


Ireland 
and  Britain 


through;  and  in  the  following  year  a  third  Home  Rule  Bill 
was  brought  in. 

A  memorable  struggle  followed.  It  was  known  that  the 
House  of  Lords  would  refuse  to  sanction  such  a  measure, 
but  no  longer  could  the  Lords  do  more  than  delay  such  a 
statute.  The  Home  Rule  Bill  of  1912,  which  satisfied 
many  of  the  Irish  people,  was  passed  again  by  the  Com- 
mons in  1913  and  1914,  in  spite  of  the  veto  of  the  Lords, 
and  was  on  the  point  of  becoming  law  when  the  Great  War 
broke  out. 

Meanwhile,  however,  very  serious  opposition  had  de- 
veloped from  a  large  part  of  the  inhabitants  of  Ulster,  who 
declared  that  they  would  under  no  circumstances  permit 
themselves  to  be  separated  from  the  government  of  the 
United  Kingdom,  since  they  feared  religious  and  economic 
oppression  from  the  Catholic  majority  in  Ireland,  if  Home 
Rule  were  established  over  them;  and  they  declared  that 
they  would  resist  such  separation  by  force.  The  Great 
War  put  an  end  to  the  question  for  a  while,  the  Home  Rule 
Bill  being  passed,  but  the  law  suspended  for  the  duration 
of  the  war. 

It  was  most  unfortunate  that  this  question  had  not  been 
settled  long  before,  since  events  were  now  to  show  that  it 
was  almost  too  late  to  undertake  any  settlement  at  all. 
For  some  time  there  had  been  coming  into  greater  promi- 
nence a  group  of  Irishmen  who  desired  to  revive  the  Celtic 
literature  and  character  of  the  past;  from  this  had  come  a 
great  deal  of  excellent  writing  in  the  so-called  Irish  Literary 
Revival,  and  also  some  attempt  to  revive  the  use  of  the 
Celtic  tongue,  which  by  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth 
century  had  almost  come  to  an  end  in  the  island.  This 
movement  went  further  under  the  leadership  of  men  whose 
motto  was  Sinn  Fein  (We  ourselves),  who  presently 
wished  to  get  complete  political  independence  for  Ireland. 

The  spirit  of  these  people,  and  of  other  radicals  in  Ireland 
was  greatly  stirred  by  the  mighty  changes  of  the  war,  and 


DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN  415 

in  April  1916  some  of  them  suddenly  rose  in  rebellion  in 
Dublin.  The  insurrection  was  quickly  crushed  and  sternly 
punished,  but  large  results  followed  from  it.  The  Irish 
people  had  not  yet  received  the  Home  Rule  and  self- 
government  which  they  had  so  long  sought,  and  they 
felt  now  little  disposed  to  make  allowance  for  the  diflBcul- 
ties  in  which  the  British  government  found  itself  during 
the  struggle  of  the  nations.  When  the  government  ruled 
with  firmness  it  alienated  most  of  the  people;  when  it  tried 
leniency  they  merely  turned  to  Sinn  Fein.  Many  of  them 
now  lost  their  desire  for  Home  Rule,  and  hoped  that  soon 
imder  Sinn  Fein  they  would  get  complete  independence. 
This  the  people  of  Britain  would  in  no  wise  consider,  since 
for  hundreds  of  years  rulers  and  statesmen  had  been  trying 
to  bring  about  the  union  of  the  British  Isles,  and  also 
because  the  geographical  position  of  Ireland  was  such  that 
she  could  control  the  principal  lines  of  communication  from 
Great  Britain  over  the  seas  to  the  sources  of  Britain's  raw 
materials  and  her  food.  If  an  independent  Ireland  were 
ever  hostile  to  Great  Britain  in  war,  or  if  she  got  into  the 
enemy's  hands,  then  the  British  might  be  starved  into 
surrender  and  their  empire  destroyed. 

By  1917  the  people  of  Britain  were  quite  willing  to  have     An  Irish 
Irishmen  govern  themselves  in  domestic  matters,  but  they     Republic 
insisted  that  Ireland  should  continue  to  be  united  with     iqiq 
Great  Britain  and  under  the  control  of  a  central  govern- 
ment in  the  matters  which  affected  them  all.     Mr.  Lloyd 
George,  who  had  become  the  prime  minister,  called  an 
Irish  Convention  to  settle  a  scheme  of  Irish  self-govern- 
ment, but  no   agreement    could    be    reached    that    was 
satisfactory  to  either  of  the  extreme  parties,  Ulster  and 
Sinn  Fein.     Most  of  the  Protestants  of  Ulster  wanted  no 
Home  Rule,  and  the  adherents  of  Sinn  Fein  sought  inde- 
pendence.    At  the  end  of  the  war,  when  general  elections 
.were  held  in  the  United  Kingdom,  Sinn  Fein  won  a  sweep- 
ing victory  in  Ireland,  electing  three  fourths  of  the  repre- 


1919 


416  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

sentatives  chosen.  They  announced  that  they  would  not 
sit  in  the  parliament  at  Westminster,  and  early  in  1919 
proclaimed  a  republic,  appealing  to  America  and  the 
Peace  Conference  at  Paris  to  give  them  assistance.  After 
the  extreme  passions  of  the  period  have  subsided  it  is  pro- 
bable that  the  Irish  will  have  self-government  satisfactory 
to  them,  and  yet,  in  outside  affairs,  remain  in  their  union 
with  Great  Britain. 
Foreign  The  foreign  relations  of  Great  Britain  during  this  period 

relations  are  best  related  in  other  connections.     Down  to  about 

1900  she  strove  to  stand  aloof  as  much  as  she  could  from 
Continental  affairs.  Her  interests  were  principally  im- 
perial and  colonial:  the  protection  of  the  colonies  already 
acquired,  and,  from  time  to  time,  the  acquiring  of  new 
ones.  For  this  a  strong  navy  rather  than  a  strong  army 
was  necessary,  and  so  Britain  did  not  usually  come  into 
rivalry  with  such  great  military  powers  as  Austria-Hungary 
and  the  German  Empire.  With  France,  however,  whose 
interests  were  also  colonial  and  naval,  and  with  Russia, 
whose  ambition  it  was  to  acquire  territorial  possessions 
near  her  own,  she  had  not  a  few  bitter  disputes.  So, 
in  1878,  during  the  Russo-Turkish  War,  Britain  made 
ready  to  oppose  Russia  as  she  had  done  before  in  the 
Crimean  War;  and  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  as  before 
at  the  Congress  of  Paris,  succeeded  in  holding  her  back. 
The  rivalry  with  France  became  even  more  acute.  With 
France  generally  there  had  been  good  relations  after  the 
'  overthrow  of  Napoleon  I,  but  following  the  establishment 

of  the  Third  Republic,  when  Frenchmen  turned  from 
Europe  to  build  up  a  great  colonial  empire  again,  and  in 
furthering  this  developed  strong  naval  power,  Britain 
became  cold  and  suspicious.  The  rivalry  culminated  in 
1898,  when  British  moving  southward  from  Egypt  met 
Frenchmen  moving  eastward  in  the  Sudan,  at  Fashoda. 
The  two  nations  came  to  the  very  brink  of  war,  which  was 
only  avoided  through  surrender  by  France.    Thereafter 


DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN  417 

conditions  became  better,  and  in  less  than  a  decade  Brit- 
ain, regarding  the  German  Empire  as  her  most  dangerous 
rival,  entered  into  the  Triple  Entente  with  Russia  and 
France. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General:  R.  H.  Gretton,  A  Modern  History  of  the  English 
People,  1880-1910,  2  vols.  (2d  ed.  1913),  liberal;  Sir  Spencer 
Walpole,  History  of  Twenty-Five  Years,  185^6-1880,  4  vols. 
(1904-8),  moderate  Liberal;  Paul  Mantoux,  A  travers  VAngle- 
terre  Contemporaine  (1909). 

Biographies  and  memoirs:  Edward  Legge,  King  Edward  in 
His  True  Colors  (1913),  More  about  King  Edward  (1913); 
Alexander  Mackintosh,  Joseph  Chamberlain  (ed.  1914);  Winston 
Churchill,  Lord  Randolph  Churchill,  2  vols.  (1906);  Stephen 
Gwynn  and  Gertrude  M.  Tuckwell,  The  Life  of  the  Rt.  Hon.  Sir 
Charles  W.  Dilke,  2  vols.  (1917);  John  (Viscount)  Morley,  The 
Life  of  William  Ewart  Gladstone,  3  vols.  (1903),  admirable;  John 
(Viscount)  Morley,  Recollections,  2  vols.  (1917) ;  R.  B.  O'Brien, 
Life  of  Charles  Stewart  Parnell,  3  vols.  (1898);  H.  D.  Traill, 
Marquis  of  Salisbury  (1891);  Lytton  Strachey,  Eminent  Victor- 
ians (1919),  briUiant  and  striking  studies. 

Social  and  economic:  C.  J.  H.  Hayes,  British  Social  Politics 
(1913),  documents;  Graham  Balfour,  The  Educational  System 
of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  (2d  ed.  1903) ;  W.  L.  Blease,  The 
Emancipation  of  English  Women  (ed.  1913);  Charles  Booth, 
editor.  Life  and  Labour  of  the  People  in  London,  17  vols.  (1892- 
1903),  containing  a  vast  amount  of  information  about  poverty 
and  the  condition  of  the  working  class;  R.  E.  Prothero,  English 
Farming  Past  and  Present  (1912) ;  The  Report  of  the  Land  Enquiry 
Committee,  A.  H.  Dyke  Acland  (chairman),  2  vols.  (1914);  A.  R. 
Wallace,  Land  Nationalization  (1882). 

The  Irish  Question:  for  a  general  account,  E.  R.  Turner, 
Ireland  and  England,  in  the  Past  and  at  Present  (1919);  P.  W. 
Joyce,  A  Concise  History  of  Ireland  from  the  Earliest  Times  to 
1908  (20th  ed.  1914) ;  Ernest  Barker,  Ireland  in  the  Last  Fifty 
Years  (1866-1916)  (1917);  Sir  Horace  Plunkett,  Ireland  in  the 
New  Century  (1904);  for  critical  and  hostile  accounts,  T.  D.  In- 
gram, A  History  of  the  Legislative  Union  of  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland  (1887),  A  Critical  Examination  of  Irish  History,  2  vols. 
(1900),  from  the  Elizabethan  conquest  to  1800;  on  Irish  condi- 


418  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

tions,  Louis  Paul-Dubois,  VIrlande  Contemporaine  et  la  Question 
Irlandaise  (1907). 

Home  Rule:  The  A  B  C  Home  Ride  Handbook,  ed.  by  C.  R. 
Buxton  (1912);  Against  Home  Rule:  the  Case  for  the  Unions 
edited  by  S.  Rosenbaum  (1912). 

The  Rebellion  of  1916:  The  Irish  Rebellion  of  1916,  edited  by 
Maurice  Joy  (1916);  W.  B.  Wells  and  N.  Marlowe,  A  History  of 
the  Irish  Rebellion  of  1916  (1917). 

Sinn  Fein:  R.  M.  Henry,  The  Evoluiion  of  Sinn  Fein  (1919); 
P.  S.  0*Hegarty,  Sinn  Fein,  an  Illumination  (1919). 

For  the  student  who  cares  to  go  further  afield  in  his  studies 
there  is  an  immense  amoimt  of  important  and  interesting 
information  concerning  a  vast  variety  of  matters  about  Great 
Britain  and  the  United  Kingdom  in  the  Parliamentary  History, 
the  Parliamentary  Debates,  and  the  numerous  Parliamentary 
Papers. 


i 


CHAPTER    VI 
RUSSIA 

For  ever  extending  its  base,  the  new  Democracy  now  aspires  to  uni- 
versal suffrage — a  fatal  error,  and  one  of  the  most  remarkable  in 
the  history  of  mankind.  .  .  .  We  may  well  ask  in  what  con- 
sists the  superiority  of  Democracy.  Everywhere  the  strongest 
man  becomes  master  of  the  State.     .     .     . 

Among  the  falsest  of  political  principles  is  the  principle  of  the  sov- 
ereignty of  the  people  ...  a  principle  which  has  unhappily 
become  more  firmly  established  since  the  time  of  the  French  Revo- 
lution. 

Were  we  to  attempt  a  true  definition  of  Parliament,  we  should  say 
that  Parliament  is  an  institution  serving  for  the  satisfaction  of  the 
personal  ambition,  vanity,  and  self-interest  of  its  members.  The 
institution  of  Parliament  is  indeed  one  of  the  greatest  illustrations 
of  human  delusion. 

KoNSTANTiN  PoBiEDONOSTSEV,  Reflections  of  a  Russian  States- 
man  (trans.  R.  C.  Long,  1898),  pp.  26,  27,  32,  34,  35. 

Alexander  III  (1881-1894),  son  of  the  murdered  Alex-  Alexander 
ander  II,  was  determined  to  avenge  the  death  of  his  father,  m 
and  crush  all  elements  of  disorder.  The  voice  of  God,  he 
said,  bade  him  strengthen  and  preserve  his  autocratic 
power.  In  temperament  he  was  a  reactionary  like  his 
grandfather,  Nicholas  I.  And  in  the  efforts  which  now  he 
made  he  was  constantly  abetted  by  Pobiedonostsev,  Pro- 
curator of  the  Holy  Synod,  a  minister  who  at  the  end  of 
the  century  stood  for  what  Metternich  had  upheld  at  the 
beginning.  Alexander  believed  that  the  good  of  the 
Russian  state  would  be  obtained  if  autocracy  was 
strengthened  and  new  ideas  kept  out,  and  he  set  himself 
to  the  task  of  undoing  what  the  reactionaries  thought  were 

419 


420 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Pobiedon- 
ostsey 


Reaction 


Land 
Captains 


Repression 


his  father's  mistakes.  Pobiedonostsev  developed  with 
sincerity  a  philosophical  basis  for  the  ideas  which  he  strove 
to  apply,  and,  like  Metternich,  he  afterward  explained 
them  in  his  Reflections.  He  believed  that  autocratic  gov- 
ernment was  not  only  best  for  the  Russians,  but  best  in 
itself,  and  that  democracy  was  a  cumbersome  thing  which 
had  arisen  in  the  errors  of  the  western  peoples.  In  the 
parliamentary  system  he  not  only  saw  the  defects  which 
others  have  seen,  but  believed  it  to  be  altogether  useless. 

In  a  short  time  the  great  reforms  of  Alexander  II  were 
largely  undone.  The  peasants  were  put  back  under  the 
control  of  the  local  upper  classes  as  much  as  possible. 
In  1886  it  was  decreed  that  breach  of  contract  by  a  Russian 
laborer  should  be  a  criminal  offence,  thus  binding  the 
lower  classes  with  stricter  economic  control.  More  im- 
portant still,  in  1889  the  local  elected  magistrates  were 
replaced  by  oflScials  known  as  Land  Captains,  to  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  provincial  governor  from  among  the  upper 
classes  of  the  neighborhood,  and  they  were  given  not  only 
judicial  but  also  administrative  functions,  so  that  they  had 
practically  unlimited  authority  over  the  peasants,  ruling 
them  at  the  behest  of  the  central  government.  In  this  way 
the  administration  of  justice  sank  back  into  the  evil  state 
of  a  generation  before.  About  the  same  time  the  character 
of  the  zemstvos,  or  provincial  assemblies,  and  the  dumas, 
or  councils  of  the  cities,  was  changed,  by  increasing  the 
representation  of  the  upper  classes  and  diminishing  that 
of  the  lower,  and  then  taking  from  the  assemblies  thus 
altered  much  of  their  power. 

In  upholding  their  system  the  methods  of  Metternich 's 
age  were  employed.  There  was  stern  regulation  of  the 
press,  and  many  newspapers  were  stopped.  The  univer- 
sities were  put  under  strictest  control.  A  great  part  of 
all  the  Russian  people  were  illiterate,  but  pernicious  west- 
em  ideas  were  to  be  kept  from  those  who  got  an  education 
in  Russia.     The  radicals  and  nihilists  were  remorselessly 


RUSSIA 


421 


pursued  by  the  secret  police;  and  the  police  of  Russia  under 
the  direction  of  Von  Plehve,  reached  a  terrible  efficiency 
previously  not  attained.  For  a  long  time  all  this  seemed 
to  succeed  well  enough.  The  Tsar  spent  the  thirteen  years 
of  his  reign  apart  from  his  people,  apart  from  his  ministers 
even,  guarded  by  the  secret  police  and  by  innumerable 
sentries,  safe  from  the  enemies  who  continued  to  threaten 
his  life  as  they  had  threatened  his  father's.  The  old  system 
of  government  and  Church  remained  unaltered  and  un- 
shaken. The  Nihilists  lost  influence  after  the  assassina- 
tion of  Alexander  II,  and  presently  lost  heart.  The  great 
mass  of  the  people,  an  ignorant  peasantry  devoted  to  the 
old  Russian  system  and  traditions  even  in  the  midst  of 
misery  which  they  endured  but  did  not  understand  how  to 
cure,  remained  passive  and  loyal.  There  was  no  powerful 
middle  class  yet,  and  the  central  government  with  its 
vast  organization  of  officials  seemed  to  hold  unassailable 
position. 

Alexander  ardently  wished  to  bring  about  greater  unity 
and  strength  by  obliterating  the  local  differences  which 
divided  the  peoples  of  his  domain.  Such  an  ideal  was  no 
new  thing.  It  had  been  cherished  by  the  rulers  of  Austria 
half  a  century  before,  by  the  Hungarians  when  they  got 
power  to  govern,  and  it  was  a  policy  which  the  rulers  of 
Germany  were  vigorously  carrying  out  in  Schleswig  and 
Posen.  Most  of  the  great  states  of  Europe  had  once  been 
formed  by  bringing  together  different  peoples;  and  though 
long  time  had  obliterated  most  of  the  differences,  some  of 
them  still  remained.  Such  divisions  were  marked  and 
important  in  Austria-Hungary  and  the  Russian  Empire. 
In  the  Dual  Monarchy  Germans  and  Magyars  often 
worked  together  with  utmost  difficulty,  while  a  great  num- 
ber of  Bohemians,  Rumanians,  Poles,  and  South  Slavs 
were  held  together  largely  by  force.  In  the  western  world 
it  was  not  generally  realized  that  the  Russian  Empire  con- 
tained peoples  as  diverse  and  forces  almost  as  disruptive 


Russifica- 
tion 


Subject 
peoples 


t 


422  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

as  those  within  Austria-Hungary.  There  was  indeed  a 
great  difference:  the  power  of  the  Dual  Monarchy  was 
based  upon  a  minority  made  up  of  Germans  and  Magyars, 
while  the  power  of  Russia  was  founded  upon  the  Great 
Russians  the  largest,  the  strongest,  and  the  most  important 
element  in  the  state.  None  the  less  the  vast  expanse  of 
the  empire  contained  other  elements  of  much  importance 
which  had  not  yet  been  welded  together,  while  in  the  out- 
lying portions  were  large  districts  containing  non-Russian 
peoples  who  had  lost  their  freedom  and  were  held  in  un- 
willing subjection. 
The  peoples  All  of  central  and  most  of  northern  Russia  were  held  by 
o  uss  a  ^Y^^  Great  Russians,  but  to  the  south  in  the  Ukraine,  the  rich- 
est district  of  the  empire  and  one  of  the  chief  sources  of 
the  wheat  supply  of  the  world,  the  people,  while  Slavic 
in  race  and  adherents  of  the  Eastern  Catholic  faith,  spoke 
a  dialect  which  differed  from  that  of  the  Great  Russians 
as  much  as  Low  German  was  unlike  High  German,  and 
they  had  developed  a  literature  of  their  own.  To  the  west 
lay  the  White  Russians,  also  Slavs  and  also  belonging  to 
the  Orthodox  Church,  but  speaking  yet  another  dialect 
of  Slavic,  and  the  Lithuanians,  an  Indo-European  people 
closely  related  to  the  Slavs,  with  their  own  distinct  speech, 
and  adhering  to  the  Roman  Catholic  religion.  Over 
Lithuania  and  to  a  less  extent  the  Ukraine,  Polish  culture 
prevailed  and  some  of  the  upper  classes  were  Polish,  for 
in  the  days  of  her  greatness  the  Kingdom  of  Poland  had 
'  included  these  outlying  dominions.     To  the  east  of  Euro- 

j>ean  Russia  the  vast  reaches  of  her  Asiatic  empire  con- 
tained a  sparse  population  of  many  diverse  peoples  but 
also,  as  the  principal  class,  Russian  immigrants  from 
Europe.  All  of  these  parts,  Great  Russia,  the  Ukraine, 
Lithuania,  Siberia,  were  sufficiently  alike  to  unite  natur- 
ally, and  the  local  differences  which  persisted  would, 
under  good  administration,  do  no  harm  or  else  disappear 
in  time. 


ARCTIC^ 


V///A  Great  Russians  t^^^^  Caucasians 

UTTTTTTin  Little  Russians  ^^  Rumanians 

\%=-=-£i  White  Russians  ■■  Germans  ; 

Poles  W^^  Uthuanians 


Letts 
flUTIHi!!?  Esthonlans 
^^  Tatars 
flnmni  Cheremiss 


\^^^y^-:h  Finns 
Y'^'/^/^i  Armenians 
PS^?^  Kalmaks 

GENERAL  DRAFTING  CO.I 


18.    RACIAL  MAP  OF  RUSSIA 


423 


424 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Outi3niig 

parts  of  th« 
£mpir« 


This  was  not  so  in  some  of  the  outlying  parts  which 
brought  Russia  down  to  the  sea  or  into  contact  with  cen- 
tral Europe.  In  the  far  north  were  the  Lapps,  a  Mon- 
golian people,  unimportant  in  their  distant  frozen  plains. 
To  the  south  of  them,  and  by  the  sea,  were  the  Finns,  also 
an  Asiatic  f)eople,  whose  country  had  long  been  possessed 
by  Sweden,  so  that  not  only  was  the  civilization  Swedish 
and  the  religion  Lutheran  but  the  people  of  the  upper 
class  were  Swedish.  Finland  had  long  been  a  distinct 
state,  as  Poland  had  been  at  first,  orga/uzed  as  a  grand 
duchy,  and  connected  with  Russia  through  the  person 
of  the  Tsar.  These  people  had  been  taken  by  conquest, 
had  no  real  bond  of  union  with  the  Russian  people,  they 
were  greatly  jealous  of  any  encroachment  on  their  priv- 
ileges, and  determined  to  maintain  their  identity  and 
character.  To  the  south  of  the  Gulf  of  Finland,  on  the 
Gulf  of  Riga,  and  down  the  coast  of  the  Baltic,  were  pro- 
vinces— Esthonia,  Livonia,  Courland — taken  from  Sweden 
or  Poland  as  Russia  won  her  outlets  here  on  the  sea. 
Their  people  were  Finns  or  Letts,  a  branch  of  the  Lithuan- 
ian people,  completely  dominated  by  a  German  upper 
class,  the  "Baltic  Barons."  Farther  to  the  west  and  the 
south,  and  thrusting  itself  in  between  Prussia  and  Austria- 
Hungary,  was  Poland,  formerly  the  Kingdom  of  Poland 
which  Russia  had  organized  and  united  with  herself  under 
the  Tsar,  and  a  part  of  the  independent  Poland  of  earlier 
days.  The  Poles  were  Roman  Catholic  in  religion,  and 
while  Slavic  in  race,  were  a  distinct  branch  of  the  Slavic 
people,  speaking  a  tongue  as  different  from  Russian  as 
Swedish  was  from  the  German.  For  a  long  time  they  had 
been  the  leading  branch  of  the  Slavs  in  Europe;  they  con- 
tinued to  feel  that  their  civilization  was  higher  than  that 
of  the  Russians;  they  clung  to  their  nationality  and  Roman 
Catholic  faith  with  passionate  devotion;  and  longed  vainly, 
it  seemed,  for  freedom  and  independence  once  more.  Far 
to  the  southeast,  between  the  Black  and  the  Caspian  seas. 


RUSSIA 


425 


was  Caucasia,  comprising  a  great  number  of  little  peoples 
of  different  races  and  religions,  strongly  conscious  of  sep- 
arate nationality.  The  great  diversity  of  peoples  in  the 
Russian  Empire  was  strikingly  seen  in  some  of  the  cities 
on  the  Volga,  where  the  market  places  were  thronged  with 
multitudes  of  strange  peoples  speaking  a  babble  of  different 
tongues. 

Nor  was  this  all.  In  European  Russia  the  larger  num- 
ber of  the  Jews  of  the  world  long  continued  to  live,  clinging 
to  their  faith,  their  customs  and  their  racial  consciousness 
as  the  Jews  have  generally  done.  More  important  but 
less  striking  was  the  German  element.  For  a  long  time 
Germans  had  been  penetrating  the  lands  of  the  Russian 
Empire,  where,  by  their  superior  culture  and  efficiency,  they 
were  able  to  exploit  the  natives.  In  the  Baltic  Provinces 
the  upper  class  was  German;  in  other  places  were  isolated 
colonies  preserving  language  and  racial  character;  almost 
everywhere  were  German  business  men  and  skilled  arti- 
sans, who  controlled  or  directed  a  great  part  of  the  econo- 
mic life  of  the  state;  while  for  a  century  and  a  half  the  Tsars 
had  usually  married  German  princesses,  and  been  attended 
by  German  favorites  and  assistants.  Russia  with  a  vast 
population  of  backward  people,  with  illimitable  resources 
and  raw  materials  to  be  exploited  and  used,  lying  right  to 
the  east  of  the  German  Empire  with  its  intelligent,  highly 
developed,  and  aggressive  people,  was  for  Germans  the  best 
field  for  economic  expansion. 

It  had  long  been  the  ambition  and  the  proper  policy  of 
states  to  achieve  as  complete  unity  as  possible.  In  the 
United  States  of  America,  where  the  population  had  been 
increased  by  emigration  from  all  parts  of  Europe,  an 
English-speaking  nation,  with  much  coherence  and  unity, 
had  been  easily  achieved  because  of  an  excellent  system  of 
education  and  as  a  result  of  liberal  institutions.  The 
children  of  immigrants  in  the  United  States  of  their  own 
accord  gave  up  the  alien  speech  and  the  foreign  customs 


Jewg  and 
Germans 


Unification 


426 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Methods    of 

RussificA- 

Uon 


Extreme 

Slavic 

nationalism 


which  their  parents  had  brought.  But  in  Russia,  where 
there  was  no  general  system  of  education,  and  where  the 
government  was  oppressive  and  inefficient,  such  unification 
could  only  be  brought  about  by  force,  and  this  the  Russian 
government  tried  to  do  in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth 
century. 

Under  Alexander  III  continued  attempt  was  made  to 
Russianize  all  the  people.  The  Jews,  the  most  evidently 
alien  part  of  the  population  and  greatly  disliked,  were  sub- 
jected to  such  persecution  as  to  deprive  them  of  "the  most 
common  rights  of  citizens."  They  were  concentrated  to- 
gether in  the  west,  in  what  was  known  as  the  Jewish  Pale, 
forbidden  to  own  land,  debarred  to  a  great  extent  from 
schools  and  the  professions,  and  often  left  to  the  mercy 
of  mobs.  The  Poles  continued  to  be  excluded  from  the 
government,  and  Russian  was  to  be  taught  in  their  schools. 
In  the  next  reign  the  particular  privileges  of  Finland  were 
withdrawn,  and  the  government  put  in  the  hands  of  Rus- 
sian officials;  while  in  the  Baltic  Provinces  Russian  was 
proclaimed  as  the  official  tongue.  The  Russian  Church, 
as  always,  cooperating  with  the  government,  forwarded 
the  work.  The  Holy  Synod  persecuted  the  members  of 
other  sects  and  forcibly  converted  some  of  them  to  the 
Orthodox  Church. 

This  policy  of  Russification  was  also  an  aspect  of  the 
extreme  nationalism  which  grew  constantly  so  much 
stronger  in  Germany,  in  Russia,  and  other  places.  During 
the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  there  rose  up 
among  the  Slavs,  and  especially  among  the  Great  Russians, 
a  host  of  writers  who  asserted  that  almost  all  of  the  in- 
habitants of  the  Russian  Empire,  and  many  peoples  of 
central  Europe  and  the  Balkans,  were  of  the  great  Slavic 
race,  best  of  all  races  in  character  and  institutions,  and 
destined  to  have  the  most  glorious  future  of  any  of  the 
peoples  of  the  earth.  The  Russian  autocracy,  the  Ortho- 
dox Church,  the  village  community  of  the  Slavs,  were  all 


RUSSIA 


427 


the  best  things  of  their  kind.  These  nationalists  incul- 
cated the  doctrine  of  Pan-Slavism,  just  as  in  central 
Europe  Pan-Germanism  was  similarly  taught.  It  was 
their  object  to  unify  the  peoples  within  Russia  and  so  make 
her  stronger,  ready  to  undertake  the  mission  of  protecting 
all  the  other  Slavs,  perhaps  some  day  of  uniting  them  all 
together. 

Under  Alexander  III  the  Russian  government  was  able 
to  maintain  itself  and  resist  all  progress.  The  Tsar  and 
some  of  his  principal  oflScials  believed  sincerely  that  the 
system  they  upheld  was  for  the  best  interests  of  the  people, 
and  they  labored  hard  to  make  Russia  strong  and  great. 
But  such  government — above  the  influence  and  criticism  of 
the  mass  of  the  people,  controlled  entirely  by  the  Autocrat 
of  all  the  Russias  yet  largely  administered  by  a  vast  num- 
ber of  officials  with  whom  he  rarely  if  ever  came  in  contact, 
and  who  therefore  did  much  as  they  pleased — contained 
the  causes  of  its  own  destruction.  Many  of  the  officials 
were  corrupt  and  inefficient,  powerful  only  in  oppressing 
the  people  beneath  them,  not  able  to  rule  honestly  or  well. 
After  a  while  the  Russian  government  came  to  be  some- 
thing like  the  systems  which  had  endured  so  long  in  west- 
ern Europe  and  then  fell  almost  of  their  own  weight  about 
the  time  of  the  French  Revolution.  It  might  long  main- 
tain itself  in  ordinary  times  over  the  great  multitude  of 
passive  Russian  peasants,  but  most  probably  it  would  be 
silently  undermined  by  imperceptible  forces,  and  if  some 
great  disaster  came  it  might  suddenly  fall  into  ruins. 
During  the  last  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  old 
Russian  system  in  reality  was  being  shaken  by  the  In- 
dustrial Revolution.  Then  in  1905  the  disasters  of  the 
Russo-Japanese  War  sHook  it  to  its  base,  and  the  greater 
calamities  of  the  War  of  the  Nations  at  last  destroyed  it 
altogether. 

The  policy  of  Alexander  III  was  continued  by  his  son 
Nicholas  II  (1894-1918).     Like  the  last  French  ruler  of 


Strength 
and    weak- 
ness  of   the 
system 


Nicholas  II 


428 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The    Indus- 
trial 

Revolution 
in    Russia 


Social  con- 
sequences 
in  Russia 


the  old  regime,  he  was  amiable  in  character,  but  also  weak 
and  easily  swayed,  whether  by  the  German  Emperor  in 
foreign  affairs  or  by  his  wife  and  his  ministers  at  home.  He 
took  what  he  found,  and  he  upheld  it  because  he  believed 
it  was  good.  To  diminish  his  autocratic  power  would  be 
most  foolish,  he  thought.  For  a  long  time  his  most 
trusted  adviser  was  Pobiedonostsev.  Von  Plehve  was 
made  Minister  of  the  Interior  and  given  enormous  power 
for  the  continuance  of  his  work.  Nicholas  approved  the 
policy  of  Russianizing  all  the  parts  of  his  dominions. 

The  forerunner  of  the  great  changes  soon  to  take  place 
was  the  Industrial  Revolution,  after  the  emancipation  of 
the  serfs  the  most  important  thing  in  the  history  of  Russia 
in  the  nineteenth  century.  Especially  under  the  guidance 
of  Count  Sergyey  Witte,  who  became  Minister  of  Finance 
in  1893,  a  large  industrial  development  went  forward. 
The  Dual  Alliance  had  just  been  made  between  Russia 
and  France,  and  a  great  amount  of  capital  was  loaned  by 
the  French.  Rapid  increase  of  the  Russian  agricultural 
population,  obliged  to  support  itself  upon  holdings  of  land 
not  sufficiently  large,  drove  increasing  numbers  of  Russian 
peasants  to  the  cities  in  search  of  work.  Tariffs  were 
levied  to  protect  new  industries,  factories  multiplied,  and 
the  population  of  the  cities  rapidly  increased.  Railroads 
were  constructed  or  extended,  until  Russian  mileage  ex- 
ceeded that  of  any  European  country;  though,  because 
of  the  large  distances  within  the  empire,  railway  facilities 
continued  to  be  more  inadequate  than  in  any  other  great 
country  of  Europe. 

About  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  more  than 
nine  tenths  of  the  people  of  the  Russian  Empire  lived  scat- 
tered in  the  country.  Upon  this  rural  population,  ignor- 
ant and  extremely  conservative,  the  earlier  reformers  and 
radicals  had  been  unable  to  make  any  impression;  and  so 
the  Nihilist  movement  had  come  to  an  end  largely  because 
it  remained  a  movement  with  leaders  but  without  many 


RUSSIA 


429 


followers  among  the  people.  Now  there  grew  up  a  larger 
urban  population,  an  industrial  proletariat  which  re- 
sponded more  quickly  to  the  ideas  of  leaders  who  wished  to 
change  the  government  and  the  system  that  existed.  In 
Moscow,  in  St.  Petersburg,  in  the  Polish  cities,  increasing 
crowds  of  overworked,  ill-paid  workingmen,  were  very  will- 
ing to  think  of  changes  in  the  state.  There  now  rose  up  the 
party  of  the  Social  Democrats,  who  hoped  that  later  on  the 
existing  system  would  be  overthrown,  after  which,  in  a  re- 
generated Russia,  socialism  might  be  established .  The  new 
leaders  obtained  adherents  more  easily  than  the  old,  yet 
the  urban  population  of  Russia  at  the  end  of  the  century 
was  still  less  than  14  per  cent,  of  the  whole.  But 
now  the  new  ideas  began  to  affect  the  peasants,  hitherto 
inert.  The  Social  Democratic  Party  of  the  workmen 
organized  the  factory  operatives  of  the  towns,  who  tried 
to  better  their  condition  and  get  their  reforms  by  strikes. 
Among  the  peasants,  who  had  no  land  or  who  had  not 
enough  land  to  support  them,  the  Socialist  Revolutionary 
Party  rose  up,  these  peasants  desiring  to  take  from  the 
great  proprietors  their  estates,  which  were  then  to  be  di- 
vided in  small  holdings. 

The  great  changes  which  now  took  place  resulted  directly 
from  terrible  disasters  which  affected  all  of  the  people. 
For  some  time  in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 
Russian  foreign  policy  continued  as  it  had  been  in  the  ear- 
lier part;  friendship  was  maintained  with  Prussia  and  the 
German  Empire,  and  Russia  continued  to  try  to  expand  to 
the  sea.  Her  efforts  to  dominate  the  Balkans  and,  per- 
haps, control  Constantinople  were  frustrated  by  Great 
Britain  after  the  Russo-Turkish  War  in  1878,  and  there- 
after by  the  opposition  of  Austria-Hungary.  Germany 
drew  closer  in  alliance  with  the  Dual  Monarchy,  but  under 
Bismarck's  masterly  handling  of  foreign  relations  Russia 
was  bound  to  Germany  by  a  secret  treaty.  In  1890,  how- 
ever, the  new  German  Emperor  refused  to  prolong  this. 


Socialism 


Foreign 
affairs 


4S0  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

and  Russia  soon  joined  France  in  the  Dual  Alliance, 
changing  her  foreign  policy  completely.  She  now  had 
increasingly  the  opposition  of  Germany  as  well  as  of  Aus- 
tria in  the  Balkans,  and  while  continuing  to  take  great 
interest  in  affairs  there  she  turned  her  attention  more  and 
more  to  expanding  her  dominions  in  Asia.  All  of  northern 
Asia,  or  Siberia,  had  been  taken  as  far  as  the  Pacific,  but 
the  Russians  hoped  to  go  southward  and  reach  ports  on 
the  warmer  seas.  Much  progress  was  made,  but  always 
in  western  Asia  the  power  of  Great  Britain  in  the  end 
blocked  the  way. 
Russia  ^^  ^^^  eastern  half  of  the  continent  Russia's  southern 

China,  and      neighbor  was  China,  and  here  the  prospect  of  success  was 
Japan  greater,  for  at  the  end  of  the  century  China  seemed  just 

about  to  fall  to  pieces.  Still  farther  to  the  east,  it  is  true, 
the  Japanese,  in  their  island  empire,  had  just  taken  up 
western  civilization  and  methods  with  amazing  capacity, 
and  in  1894-5  gained  a  complete  triumph  in  the  Chinese- 
Japanese  War;  but  Japan  was  not  yet  regarded  as  a  match 
for  any  great  European  power,  and  at  once  Japan  was 
by  Russia,  Germany,  and  France  compelled  to  give  up 
most  of  the  fruits  of  her  victory.  The  so-called  Trans- 
Siberian  railway,  which  had  been  begun  in  1891,  and 
which  was  to  run  from  Moscow  to  Vladivostok  on  the 
Pacific,  was  being  pushed  steadily  forward,  and  Russian 
expansionists  dreamed  of  splendid  possessions  soon  to  be 
^  got  from  the  dying  Chinese  Empire  and  the  acquisition  at 

last  of  an  ice-free  ocean  port.  This  was  a  time  when 
apparently  China  was  about  to  be  divided  up  among  preda- 
tory European  powers.  In  1897  the  Germans  seized 
Kiao-Chau.  Next  year  France  got  concessions  in  south- 
em  China;  and  at  the  same  time  Russia  obtained  much 
greater  ones  in  the  north.  In  1898  she  obtained  from  the 
Chinese  government  the  right  to  build  the  Siberian  railway 
across  Manchuria;  she  was  soon  in  possession  of  that  pro- 
vince, and  she  got  a  lease  of  the  great  stronghold,  Port 


RUSSIA 


431 


Arthur,  at  the  end  of  the  Liao-tung  peninsula,  from  which 
Japan  had  shortly  before  been  compelled  to  go,  and  which 
she  now  joined  with  her  railway  by  a  branch  line,  and 
converted  into  one  of  the  strongest  positions  in  the  world. 
After  the  Boxer  outbreak  in  1900,  the  Russians  took  com- 
plete possession  of  Manchuria,  and,  in  the  years  that 
followed,  threatened  to  advance  farther  and  absorb  Korea, 
which  lay  on  the  flank  of  their  communication  between 
Manchuria  and  Liao-tung.  Not  only  had  Japan  long 
wished  to  obtain  Korea,  but  such  was  its  geographical  posi- 
tion, pointed  directly  at  the  heart  of  Japan,  that  in  the 
hands  of  Russia  it  might  be  as  dangerous  as  Belgium,  in 
the  possession  of  Napoleon  or  the  German  Empire,  would 
have  been  to  Great  Britain.  In  February  1904  the  Japan- 
ese suddenly  struck  and  then  declared  war. 

Japan  was  greatly  inferior  in  resourses,  but  she  had  a 
splendid  modern  army  of  brave,  hardy,  and  devoted 
soldiers,  and  an  excellent  fleet.  Russia,  far  stronger,  with 
greater  army  and  fleet,  was  badly  organized  and  poorly 
prepared,  and  fought  moreover  far  from  her  base.  Japan 
was  close  to  the  area  of  conflict. 

The  beginning  of  the  struggle  found  the  Russian  fleet  in 
the  east  divided,  part  at  Port  Arthur,  part  at  Vladivostok. 
At  once,  before  declaration  of  war  had  been  made,  the 
warships  in  Port  Arthur  were  attacked  and  greatly  dam- 
aged. When  at  last,  some  months  later  this  fleet  came 
forth  to  give  battle,  it  sustained  a  terrible  defeat.  The 
squadron  at  Vladivostok  was  destroyed ;  and  the  Japanese 
got  undisputed  control  of  the  sea. 

Meanwhile  they  had  sent  a  great  army  over  into  Korea, 
from  which  an  inferior  force  of  Russians  was  quickly 
driven.  Then  one  Japanese  army  advanced  into  Man- 
churia, while  another  went  down  the  Liao-tung  peninsula 
to  lay  siege  to  Port  Arthur.  Everywhere  the  Russians 
were  defeated.  In  September  at  Liao-yang  was  fought 
the  first  great  battle  in  which  the  fearful  new  devices  of 


The    Russo- 
Japanese 
War,  1904-5 


Japan  gets 
control  of 
tbe  sea 


Japanese 
victories 
on  land 


432 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Mukden 


Tsushima, 
the  decisive 
victory 


war  were  used  by  large  armies.  The  Russians  were  en- 
trenched in  a  wonderfully  fortified  position,  but  after 
terrible  slaughter  the  Japanese  drove  them  out.  Mean- 
while the  Japanese  attempted  to  carry  the  impregnable 
fortress  of  Port  Arthur  by  storm.  Hideous  slaughter  re- 
sulted, but  in  January  1905,  after  a  long  siege,  the  fortress 
was  taken.  At  the  end  of  February  the  main  Japanese 
army,  reinforced  by  the  army  which  had  captured  Port 
Arthur  and  now  amounting  to  about  three  hundred  thou- 
sand men,  attacked  the  Russians  who  had  about  the  same 
number.  In  the  next  two  weeks,  in  a  great  struggle  known 
as  the  Battle  of  Mukden,  the  Russians  were  driven  back  in 
complete  defeat,  losing  a  third  of  their  number. 

In  all  the  principal  engagements  thus  far  the  Russians 
had  been  beaten,  but  they  might  still  hope  for  victory  in 
the  end,  for  whereas  the  Japanese  had  brought  into  play 
nearly  all  their  force  the  Russians,  who  were  not  yet  vitally 
wounded,  had  used  only  a  part  of  theirs.  If  they  could 
get  control  of  the  sea,  the  Japanese  armies  would  at  once 
be  cut  off  from  their  base  and  quickly  forced  to  yield;  and 
if  this  failed,  then  in  a  contest  of  resources  Japan  might 
first  be  worn  out.  The  Baltic  fleet,  what  remained  of 
Russia's  power  on  the  sea,  was  aheady  on  its  way  around 
the  world,  superior  to  the  enemy  in  numbers,  but  inferior 
in  equipment  and  personnel.  May  27,  1905,  it  encoun- 
tered the  Japanese  fleet  under  Admiral  Togo  in  the  Battle 
of  Tsushima,  near  Japan,  by  far  the  greatest  sea  fight  since 
Trafalgar,  and  one  of  the  most  decisive  in  history.  There 
the  Japanese  ships,  with  superior  speed  and  range  of  fire, 
got  the  position  which  they  desired  and  performed  the 
maneuver  of  "capping  the  line";  for  as  the  Russian  ships 
advanced  in  column  formation,  they  at  their  own  distance 
steamed  across  the  path  of  the  approaching  enemy  and 
destroyed  his  ships  in  succession.  The  Russian  fleet  was 
annihilated,  and  Japanese  control  of  the  sea  finally  as^ 
sured. 


RUSSIA 


The  war  was  not  yet  won,  however.  Japan  was  almost 
completely  exhausted.  If  the  Russians  persisted,  time  was 
probably  on  their  side.  But  domestic  considerations  now 
caused  them  to  lose  heart  and  abandon  the  struggle. 
President  Roosevelt  of  the  United  States  attempted  to 
mediate,  and  plenipotentiaries  met  at  Portsmouth,  where 
a  treaty  was  signed  September  5th.  By  the  terms  of  the 
Treaty  of  Portsmouth,  Russia  abandoned  to  Japan  Port 
Arthur  and  her  rights  in  the  Liao-tung  peninsula,  gave 
over  her  attempts  upon  Manchuria  and  Korea,  and  ceded 
to  Japan  the  southern  part  of  Sakhalin,  an  island  to  the 
north  of  the  Japanese  group,  and,  indeed,  forming  an  ex- 
tension of  the  archipelago  of  Japan.  In  the  Far  East  Japan 
became  now  the  dominant  power,  and  presently  seemed  to 
threaten  China. 

Russia  had  yielded  principally  because  such  internal 
unrest  and  confusion  had  arisen  that  the  whole  structure 
of  her  government  seemed  near  to  the  point  of  collapse. 
The  system  which  the  government  had  upheld  by  force, 
by  arbitrary  arrests,  by  secret  trial,  by  banishment  to 
Siberia,  through  the  power  of  the  secret  police  and  the 
army,  could  be  maintained  only  so  long  as  Russia  was  at 
peace.  Now  the  government  was  deeply  mvolved  in  a 
distant  war,  which  was  never  popular,  which  most  of  the 
people  ill  understood,  in  which  patriotic  fervor  was  never 
aroused.  Had  there  been  a  great  success,  the  military 
glory  abroad  might  have  stilled  discontent  at  home,  but 
when  news  came  of  repeated  and  shameful  defeats  in  Man- 
churia and  on  the  seas  about  China,  popular  fury  burst 
out,  and  the  radicals  among  the  workingmen  of  the  towns, 
the  radical  peasants  in  the  country,  the  liberals  of  the  upper 
and  middle  classes,  and  all  the  oppressed  peoples — the  Jews, 
the  Poles,  the  Finns,  and  others — turned  against  the  author- 
ities, and  it  was  no  longer  possible  to  resist  them. 

In  July  1904  Von  Plehve  was  blown  to  pieces  by  a 
bomb;  in  the  following  February  the  Grand  Duke  Serzei, 


The  Treaty 
of  Ports- 
mouth, 1905 


Discontent 
and  disorder 
in  Russia' 


Terror  and 
uprising 


484 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Sunday** 


The  first 
Duma 
proclaimed, 
1905 


The  October 
Manifesto 


reactionary  uncle  of  the  Tsar,  was  assassinated;  and  after 
that  a  great  many  murders  of  officials  took  place.  In  the 
cities  workingmen  declared  great  strikes,  and  presently 
a  general  strike  brought  widespread  demoralization.  In 
the  country  districts  angry  and  ignorant  peasants  drove 
away  country  gentlemen  and  noble  landlords,  burning 
their  houses  and  taking  their  lands  as  peasants  in  France 
had  done  a  century  before.  In  some  parts  of  the  country 
it  was  difficult  to  operate  the  railways,  and  in  outlying 
provinces  armed  insurrections  broke  out.  On  "Red 
Sunday,"  January  22,  1905  a  great  procession  of  strikers 
in  St.  Petersburg  followed  a  priest  to  present  a  petition  to 
the  Tsar,  but  the  troops  fired  upon  them,  and  the  blood- 
shed aroused  wild  indignation  and  horror.  During  all  this 
time  the  liberals  of  the  upper  classes  were  demanding  re- 
forms, and  they  along  with  many  others  insisted  that  the 
war  should  be  ended. 

Nicholas  II  soon  yielded  to  the  general  clamor.  He 
tried  at  first  to  give  satisfaction  with  small  reform.  Some 
concessions  were  made  to  the  Poles,  the  Lithuanians  and 
the  Jews,  and  presently  Finland  got  back  her  constitution, 
while  the  arrears  due  from  the  Russian  peasants  were 
remitted.  But  he  was  urged  to  summon  a  national  assem- 
bly, and  in  August  1905  proclaimed  a  law  establishing  an 
Imperial  Duma,  or  assembly,  to  advise  him  in  legislative 
work.  He  dismissed  Pobiedonostsev  and  other  reaction- 
aries previously  all-powerful,  and  appointed  Witte  to  be 
prime  minister  in  the  cabinet  now  to  be  set  up.  Then  he 
issued  the  October  Manifesto  which  established  freedom  of 
religion,  of  speech,  and  of  association,  and  promised  that 
thereafter  no  law  should  be  made  without  the  Duma^s 
consent.  A  series  of  decrees  provided  that  the  members 
of  the  Duma  should  be  elected  practically  by  universal 
suffrage.  The  old  Council  of  State,  which  had  been  much 
like  a  king's  council  in  the  Middle  Ages,  was  now  changed 
so  that  part  of  its  members  were  indirectly  elected,  and  it 


RUSSIA 


435 


was  made  the  upper  house  of  the  National  Assembly  with 
the  Duma  as  the  lower. 

These  reforms  had  been  yielded  in  a  period  of  great 
weakness.  The  bureaucracy  of  officials  and  most  of  the 
powerful  upper  class  were  sternly  against  such  concession. 
Moreover,  the  reformers  almost  immediately  began  to 
fall  apart.  To  the  radicals  it  seemed  that  little  had  been 
accomplished,  and  they  desired  to  bring  about  much  more 
fundamental  changes.  The  liberals  divided  into  two  par- 
ties: the  "Octobrists'*  were  content  with  what  had  been 
granted  by  the  Tsar  in  the  October  Manifesto,  and  they 
wanted  a  strong  united  Russia  now  under  his  rule;  the 
"Constitutional  Democrats"  or  "Cadets"  under  their  well 
known  leader.  Professor  Miliukov,  wanted  a  constitutional 
government  like  that  of  England  or  France,  with  respon- 
sible ministers  completely  controlled  by  elected  represen- 
tatives of  the  people,  and  they  advocated  a  federal  union 
for  the  different  parts  of  the  Empire. 

In  September,  1905,  the  war  with  Japan  was  ended;  the 
government  was  immediately  relieved  from  much  of  its 
embarrassment,  while  it  had  now  a  far  greater  military 
force  to  be  used  at  home.  It  was  not  long  before  the  no- 
bles, great  landlords,  and  reactionaries  generally  united, 
and  becoming  stronger,  by  means  of  armed  forces  known 
as  the  "Black  Hundreds"  began  to  drive  away  the  radicals 
and  undo  the  changes  which  they  had  accomplished. 
During  the  same  time  the  Tsar  began  to  withdraw  the 
powers  given  to  the  Duma.  In  the  decree  of  March,  1906, 
he  proclaimed  that  the  fundamental  laws  of  the  Empire 
were  not  to  be  within  the  power  of  the  Duma,  and  declared 
that  foreign  affairs,  the  army,  the  navy  were  exclusively 
within  his  own  jurisdiction.  In  May,  1906,  the  first  Duma 
assembled,  but  it  w^as  unable  to  control  the  ministers,  and 
after  a  bitter  struggle  it  was  dissolved  in  July.  The 
Cadets,  who  had  made  up  the  majority  of  the  body,  would 
not  accept  the  dismissal,  and  retiring  to  Viborg  in  Finland, 


Speedy 
reaction 


The   "Black 
Hundreds" 


The  first 
DumSf  190<S 


436 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Th«    second 
Duma,  1907 


The  third 
Duma,  1907 


The  years 
before  the 
Great  War 


called  on  the  Russian  people  to  support  them.  But  re- 
action was  now  running  strongly;  many  of  the  government 
opponents  were  put  to  death  and  many  more  banished  from 
the  country. 

A  second  Duma  was  assembled  next  year,  but,  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  government  again  controlling  it  and  again 
seeking  radical  changes,  it  also  was  dissolved  after  sitting 
for  three  months.  The  Tsar  now  issued  a  decree  by  which 
the  electoral  law  was  so  altered  that  control  would  pass  to 
the  conservatives  and  the  wealthy  classes.  The  third 
Duma,  elected  in  1907,  contained  a  majority  willing  to 
acquiesce  in  the  government's  policy.  The  Duma,  ac- 
cordingly, remained  a  consultative  body,  much  like  the 
English  parliament  had  been  three  hundred  years  before; 
which  was,  perhaps,  as  much  as  the  Russian  people  were 
capable  of  using,  in  their  stage  of  political  evolution.  The 
Almanack  de  Gotha,  with  what  the  Russian  radical  Trotzky 
described  as  unconscious  humor,  declared  that  the  govern- 
ment of  Russia  was  "a  constitutional  monarchy  under  an 
autocratic  Tsar."  Under  Stolypin,  the  principal  minister, 
stern  measures  were  taken  against  the  radicals,  and  they 
were  completely  suppressed.  Some  reforms  were  indeed 
made.  In  1906  the  peasants  were  allowed  to  become 
owners  of  their  land  allotments  in  the  miV;  and  so  far 
as  this  was  carried  out,  it  brought  the  old  communal 
holding  to  an  end. 

What  the  future  of  Russia  might  have  been  had  peace 
lasted,  whether  the  reactionaries  would  have  seated  them- 
selves more  firmly  in  power,  or  whether  constitutional  pro- 
gress would  have  gone  slowly  forward,  cannot  be  known. 
In  the  years  between  the  Revolution  of  1905  and  the  Great 
War  the  country  seemed  to  settle  down;  slowly  the  harsh 
measures  of  government  were  lessened;  the  ravages  of  the 
war  were  repaired;  the  army  was  strengthened;  a  great 
appropriation  was  made  to  rebuild  the  navy;  and  increas- 
ingly Russia  took  her  place  once  more  in  European  coun- 


RUSSIA  437 

cils.  Again  she  became  a  powerful  member  of  the  Dual 
Alliance,  and  presently  settling  her  differences  with  Eng- 
land, along  with  England  and  France  made  the  Triple 
Entente.  Her  expansion  in  the  Far  East  having  been 
checked  she  turned  again  with  greater  interest  to  the  Bal- 
kans, coming  there  into  more  and  more  dangerous  rivalry 
with  Austria-Hungary  and  the  German  Empire.  It  was 
this  clash  of  interests  which  produced  the  Bosnian  crisis 
of  1908-9,  in  which  Russia  yielded;  the  crisis  of  19i2, 
occasioned  by  the  Balkan  War,  in  which  she  held  her  own; 
and  the  crisis  of  1914,  which  led  to  the  War  of  the  Nations, 
in  which  presently  Russia,  Austria-Hungary,  and  the 
German  Empire  all  went  down  into  ruin. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General:  Gregor  Alexinsky  (trans,  by  B.  Miall),  Modern 
Russia  (1913),  by  a  socialist;  Maurice  Baring,  The  Russian 
People  (2d  ed.  1911);  Ludwik  Kulczycki,  Geschichte  der  Russi- 
chen  Revolution,  3  vols.  (1910-14),  German  trans,  from  the  Polish, 
covers  the  period  1825-1900;  and  for  a  book  revealing  with  pe- 
culiar ability  and  force  the  spirit  of  the  ruling  class,  Konstantin 
P.  Pobiedonostsev,  Reflections  of  a  Russian  Statesman  (trans, 
by  R.  C.  Long,  1898). 

The  Jews:  Israel  Friedlander,  The  Jews  of  Russia  and 
Poland  (1915). 

Siberia:  George  Kennan,  Siberia  and  the  Exile  System,  2  vols. 
(4th  ed.  1897);  M.  M.  Shoemaker,  The  Great  Siberian  Railway 
(1903). 

The  Russians  in  Asia:  A.  J.  Beveridge,  The  Russian  Advance 
(1903) ;  H.  Lansdell,  Russian  Central  Asia,  2  vols.  (1885) ;  G.  F. 
Wright,  Asiatic  Russia,  2  vols.  (1902),  best  account. 

Japan:  T.  Brinkley  and  Baron  Kikuchi,  A  History  of  the 
Japanese  People  from  the  Earliest  Times  to  the  End  of  the  Meiji 
Era  (1915),  best;  Marquis  de  la  Mazeliere,  Le  Japon:  Histoire  et 
Civilisation,  5  vols.  (1907-10);  G.  H.  Longford,  The  Story  of 
Korea  (1911). 

The  Russo-Japanese  War:  K.  Asakawa,  The  Russo-Japanese 
Conflict  (1904) ;  A.  S.  Hershey,  The  International  Law  and  Diplo- 
macy of  the  Russo-Japanese  War  (1906) ;  A.  N.  (General)  Kuro- 


438  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

patkin.  The  Russian  Army  and  tlie  Japanese  War^  2  vols,  (trans, 
by  A.  B.  Lindsay,  1909) ;  Tfie  Russo-Japanese  War^  by  the  His- 
torial  Section  of  the  German  General  Staff,  trans,  by  Karl  von 
Donat,  5  vols.  (1908-10) — it  was  the  German  military  experts 
who  most  thoroughly  comprehended  the  lessons  of  this  conflict. 
The  Revolution  of  1905  and  the  years  following:  Maxime 
Kovalevsky,  La  Cruse  Russe  (1916);  Paul  Miliukov,  Russia  and 
Its  Cri.ns  (1905);  Bernard  Pares,  Russia  and  Reform  (1907); 
S.  N.  Harper,  The  New  Electoral  Law  for  the  Russian  Duma 
(1908);  Paul  Vinogradoff,  The  Russian  Problem  (1914). 


CHAPTER  VII 

AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    AND     THE 
BALKANS 

A  E  I  O  U 

[Austria  Erit  In  Orbe  Ultima.] 

Motto  of  the  Hapsburgs,  adopted  in  1443. 

But  in  another  sense  they  have  proved  an  eminently  conservative 
force,  for  they  have  perpetuated  and  preserved,  as  if  in  a  museum, 
the  strange  medley  which  existed  in  South  Eastern  Europe  during 
the  last  years  of  the  Byzantine  Empire.  Their  idea  of  government 
has  always  been  simply  to  take  tribute  and  secure  the  permanent 
position  of  the  Osmanli. 
"Odysseus"  (Sir  Charles  Eliot],  Turkey  in  Europe  (1908),  p.  18. 

The  domestic  history  of  Austria  during  the  period  1867-  The  Dual 
1914  was  one  of  political  discord  and  much  discontent  on  Monarchy 
the  part  of  the  subject  peoples,  but  withal  much  advance 
in  prosperity  and  material  greatness.  The  Industrial 
Revolution,  which  had  for  a  generation  been  changing  cen- 
tral Europe,  went  forward  in  the  Dual  Monarchy  as  in  the 
new  German  Empire,  though  it  was  far  eclipsed  by  the 
mighty  progress  there.  Railway  communications  were 
developed  and  great  factories  arose  in  Austria  and  Bohe- 
mia, bringing  industrial  prosperity  for  part  of  the  people. 
During  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  also 
agriculture  in  the  fertile  plain  of  Hungary  was  developed 
as  never  before,  until  Hungary  became  one  of  the  great 
wheat  producing  districts  of  Europe.  Furthermore, 
public  improvements  were  made,  and  education  was  fos- 
tered, not  as  in  Germany  and  in  France,  yet  so  far  that 

439 


440 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 
Aua^Ieich 


Contribu- 
tions for 
joint 
expenditure 


Austria-Hungary  was  one  of  the  progressive  countries  of 
Europe. 

The  domestic  politics  of  all  this  period  were  concerned 
with  the  relations  between  the  two  partners  in  the  Dual 
Monarchy,  and  then  with  the  relations  between  each  one 
of  them  and  the  subject  peoples  whom  they  ruled.  By  the 
Ausgleich  or  Compromise  of  1867  Austria  and  Hungary 
were  joined  together  under  an  agreement  which  was  ar- 
ranged for  ten  years.  Accordingly  once  in  a  decade  the 
arrangement  was  brought  forward  for  renewal,  and  on 
each  occ^ion  there  was  more  strain  and  confusion  than  a 
presidential  election  caused  in  the  United  States.  Each 
time  it  was  necessary  to  renew  or  rearrange  commercial 
relations  and  decide  about  apportionment  of  contributions 
to  support  the  general  government.  Austria  continued 
her  industrial  development  while  Hungary  remained  for 
the  most  part  an  agricultural  district.  In  the  Monarchy, 
however,  the  interests  of  both  were  subserved  by  putting 
protective  tariff  duties  upon  foreign  manufactures  for  the 
benefit  of  Austria,  and  protective  duties  upon  foreign  agri- 
cultural products  to  benefit  Hungarian  proprietors.  The 
proportions  to  be  contributed  by  each  for  joint  expenditure 
caused  much  difficulty.  By  the  first  Ausgleich  treaty 
Austria  was  to  give  70  per  cent,  and  Hungary  30  per  cent., 
but  forty  years  later  Hungary's  share  was  somewhat  in- 
creased to  36.4  per  cent.,  she  having  meanwhile  enjoyed 
much  advantage.  More  furious  were  the  disputes  that 
raged  about  the  question  of  the  army.  Like  France,  Austria- 
Hungary  adopted  the  Prussian  system  of  compulsory  mili- 
tary service.  Since  unity  was  necessary  in  the  making  of 
strong  military  power,  the  authorities  at  Vienna  declared 
that  German  should  be  the  language  of  command  through- 
out the  army,  but  the  Hungarians  sternly  insisted  that 
their  language  should  be  used  for  the  troops  which  Hun- 
gary furnished.  This  question  threatened  at  times  to 
destroy  the  Ausgleich,  and  in  1897  it  was  not  possible  to 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    441 


come  to  any  agreement.  The  use  of  German  was  enforced 
however,  by  decree  of  the  emperor-king.  Meanwhile 
questions  of  recruiting  and  appointing  officers  were  left 
to  the  governments  of  the  two  parts. 

During  all  of  this  time  the  partners  were  held  together 
because  people  in  Austria  and  in  Hungary  saw  that  the 
two  countries  could  not  easily  stand  alone  in  the  midst  of 
their  hostile  subjects  and  surrounded  by  more  powerful 
neighbors.  At  times  the  disputes  were  so  furious  and  bit- 
ter that  to  outsiders  it  seemed  impossible  for  them  to  live 
together  longer,  but  always  the  fundamental  need  of  asso- 
ciation remained  and  was  well  understood.  Furthermore, 
there  was  a  strong  connecting  link  in  the  person  of  Franz 
Josef  (1848-1916),  Emperor  of  Austria  and  King  of  Hun- 
gary, whose  personal  qualities  endeared  him  to  his  sub- 
jects. Much  about  his  character  and  motives  remains 
ill-understood,  but  strange  and  terrible  misfortunes  made 
him  the  most  romantic  and  pathetic  great  personage  in 
Europe. 

He  came  to  his  throne  in  the  midst  of  the  disasters  of 
1848.  Not  many  years  later  he  lost  in  wars  with  France 
and  Prussia  the  Italian  provinces,  which  seemed  then  his 
brightest  possession,  and  the  position  of  leadership  in 
Germany  which  Austria  had  so  long  had.  The  state  was 
constituted  anew,  and  much  prosperity  came,  but  in  the 
year  after  the  disastrous  war  with  Prussia,  his  brother, 
Maximilian,  Emperor  of  Mexico,  was  captured  by  his  en- 
raged subjects  and  shot  as  a  conspirator  against  the  state. 
In  1889  his  only  son,  the  Archduke  Rudolph,  died  by  sui- 
cide in  the  midst  of  mysterious  and  romantic  circum- 
stances never  entirely  cleared  up.  Eight  years  after  this 
his  wife,  the  beautiful  Empress  Elizabeth,  from  whom  he 
had  long  been  estranged,  was  stabbed  to  death  by  an  anar- 
chist at  Geneva.  Finally,  his  nephew,  Archduke  Franz 
Ferdinand,  now  heir  to  the  throne,  was  murdered  by  as- 
sassins.    And  in  1916,  during  the  war  that  followed  hard 


Ties  con- 
necting 
Austria   and 
Hungary 


The  ending 
of  the 
House  of 
Hapsburg 


442 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Parts  of  the 

Dual 

Monarchy 


The  govem- 
mtnt  of 
Austria 


Peoples 
Austria 


on  this  deed,  the  aged  Emperor  passed  away  just  before  his 
empire  was  destroyed. 

In  the  Dual  Monarchy  the  Empire  of  Austria  included 
the  archduchies  of  Upper  Austria  and  Lower  Austria,  the 
kingdoms  of  Bohemia,  Dalmatia,  and  Galicia,  and  the 
various  districts  of  Bukowina,  Carinthia,  Carniola,  Istria, 
Moravia,  Salzburg,  Styria,  and  Trieste.  The  Kingdom  of 
Hungary  included  Hungary,  Transylvania,  and  Croatia- 
Slavonia.  The  total  area  of  Austria  was  116,000  square 
miles,  a  little  less  than  the  territory  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Hungary,  which  was  125,000  .  In  1910,  at  the  time  of  the 
last  census,  the  population  of  Austria  was  28,000,000  while 
that  of  Hungary  was  21,000,000;  the  total  population, 
including  that  of  Bosnia-Herzegovina,  which  was  annexed 
to  the  Dual  Monarchy  jointly,  was  51,000,000. 

By  the  constitutional  laws  of  1867  the  government  of 
Austria  was  vested  in  the  emperor  and  in  the  Reichsrath 
(imperial  assembly),  composed  of  a  house  of  lords,  con- 
sisting of  peers  hereditary  or  appointed  by  the  emperor  for 
life,  and  a  house  of  representatives,  elected  at  first  by  the 
provincial  diets  or  assemblies,  but  after  1873  chosen 
directly  by  a  narrow  electorate.  The  franchise  was 
widened  by  an  electoral  reform  in  1896,  and  in  1907  equal 
and  direct  manhood  suffrage  was  established.  The  gov- 
ernment was  carried  on  by  ministers,  responsible  to  the 
Reichsrath  in  theory,  but  actually  dependent  mostly  on 
the  emperor,  who  was  also  easily  able  to  control  the 
Reichsrath,  of  which  the  upper  house  was  extremely  con- 
servative and  aristocratic,  and  the  lower  divided  among 
numerous  political  parties  and  constantly  torn  by  bitter 
racial  disputes. 

The  general  policy  of  the  Austrian  government  was  the 
maintenance  of  the  power  and  privileges  of  the  German 
inhabitants  who  had  brought  together  the  parts  and  long 
been  the  masters.  Out  of  28,000,000  inhabitants  they 
numbered  only  10,000,000,  and  with  the  development  of 


AUSTRIA,   TURKEY,  BALKANS    4t3 

greater  national  feeling  in  the  different  parts  their  task 
became  constantly  harder.  Some  local  self-government 
was  granted  to  the  different  parts,  but  not  enough  to  satisfy 
the  local  populations.  The  Czechs  of  Bohemia  had  long 
wanted  an  autonomy  like  that  which  had  been  granted  to 
the  Hungarians,  and  often  adopted  such  tactics  in  the 
AbgeordnetenhauSy  the  lower  chamber  of  the  Reicksrath, 
that  the  uproar  and  confusion  made  it  impossible  for  any- 
thing to  be  done.  The  Slovaks  and  the  South  Slavs  nursed 
their  grievances  and,  in  spite  of  no  little  advance  in  pros- 
perity, longed  for  their  freedom.  In  Galicia  the  Austrian 
government  succeeded  better  than  anywhere  else,  but 
that  was  because  it  conserved  the  privileges  of  the 
Polish  upper  class,  and  so  got  their  good  will,  while 
it  left  the  Ruthenians  and  the  Polish  masses  in  lowly 
condition. 

Government  in  Hungary  was  founded  directly  upon  a  The  govern- 
series  of  laws  passed  during  the  Hungarian  uprising  in  ™«°*  ®^ 
1848,  suppressed  as  soon  as  the  uprising  failed,  but  guaran-  angary 
teed  in  1867  when  the  Ausgleich  was  agreed  on.  It  was 
vested  in  the  King  of  Hungary,  who  was  Emp)eror  of  Aus- 
tria, and  exercised  by  his  ministers  who  were  responsible 
to  a  parliament.  This  parliament  consisted  of  an  upper 
aristocratic  house,  the  Table  of  Magnates,  most  of  them 
hereditary  noblemen,  and  a  lower,  the  Chamber  of  Deputies, 
consisting  of  members  almost  all  of  whom  were  elected 
from  Hungary  proper  by  a  narrow  electorate  rigidly  lim- 
ited by  property  qualifications.  This  electorate  was  so 
arranged  as  to  keep  power  altogether  in  the  hands  of  the 
10,000,000  Hungarians,  who  were  a  little  less  than  half  of 
the  entire  population.  Local  self-government  was  given 
to  the  subject  peoples  in  Hungary,  the  Rumanians  of  Tran- 
sylvania and  the  South  Slavs  of  Croatia-Slavonia,  more 
grudgingly  than  it  was  given  in  Austria. 

Altogether,  in  the  Hapsburg  Monarchy  government 
by  ministers  responsible  to  a  parliament  dependent  on 


444 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


the  people  was  really  established  only  in  small  part.  In 
Hungary  most  of  the  people  had  no  voice  in  electing  repre- 
sentatives, and  until  1896  this  had  been  the  case  in  Austria 
also.  In  both  parts  of  the  Dual  Monarchy  government 
was  in  the  hands  of  ministers  controlled  by  the  crown,  and 
a  bureaucracy,  cumbersome  and  inefficient  also  dependent 
on  the  crown. 

The  foreign  policy  of  Austria-Hungary  during  this 
period  had  to  do  mostly  with  ambitions  in  the  Balkans 
and  attempts  to  extend  to  the  south.  With  the  new  Ger- 
man Empire  cordial  relations  were  established.  With 
respect  to  Italy  the  old  ambitions  were  completely  given 
over.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century,  while 
other  European  powers  were  making  themselves  greater 
by  colonial  expansion  the  Dual  Monarchy  hoped  to  reach 
southward  along  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Adriatic  and 
down  through  the  Balkans  to  an  outlet,  perhaps  at  Salon- 
ica.  As  early  as  the  War  for  Greek  Independence  it  was 
evident  that  Austria  and  Russia  were  suspicious  of  each 
other  in  rivalry  about  the  Balkans.  This  was  more  appar- 
ent in  1877,  when  the  Russo-Turkish  War  began.  In  the 
next  year,  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  when  Russia  was 
forced  to  let  a  great  part  of  what  she  had  accomplished  be 
undone,  Austria-Hungary  was  given  the  administration 
of  the  two  Turkish  provinces  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina, 
peopled  with  South  Slavs,  and  conveniently  adjoining  her 
own  Slavic  provinces  of  Dalmatia  and  Croatia-Slavonia. 
In  the  following  year  she  joined  the  German  Empire  in 
alliance,  from  which  she  got  added  protection  against 
Russia,  though  Germany  was  not  yet  disposed  to  forfeit 
the  friendship  of  Russia. 

Year  by  year  the  rivalry  of  Austria-Hungary  and  Russia 
for  greater  power  and  influence  in  the  Balkans  increased. 
In  1898  an  agreement  was  made  between  Austria  and 
Russia,  and  their  "superior  interest"  in  the  provinces  of 
European  Turkey  was  recognized  by  the  Great  Powers. 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    445 


At  that  very  time,  however,  began  the  new  direction  of 
German  policy  which  tended  toward  expansion  in  Asiatic 
Turkey,  and  which  therefore  supported  Austria-Hungary. 
The  two  powers  now  worked  together  in  close  understand- 
ing for  predominant  influence  in  the  Balkans  and  at  Con- 
stantinople, for  the  gradual  exclusion  of  Russia,  and  the 
connecting  of  the  German-planned  Bagdad  Railway  with 
the  road  running  from  Constantinople  to  Vienna  and  Berlin. 
It  was  not  merely  ambition  but  sound  policy  which 
caused  statesmen  of  the  Dual  Monarchy  to  take  interest 
in  Balkan  aflFairs.  As  the  Ottoman  Empire  had  shrunk 
and  decayed  in  Europe  part  of  the  South  Slavic  and  Ru- 
manian people  whom  Turkey  ruled  were  incorporated  in 
Austria  and  in  Hungary,  while  part  of  them  afterward 
shook  off  the  Sultan's  yoke  and  set  up  independent 
states  for  themselves.  In  Transylvania  and  Bukowina 
there  were  more  than  three  million  Rumanians,  while  in 
Rumania,  just  across  the  Carpathian  Mountains  there  were 
8,000,000  more.  In  the  southern  provinces  of  the  Mon- 
archy just  before  the  war  there  were  7,000,000  Jugo- 
slavs, while  across  the  border  in  Montenegro  and  Servia 
there  were  5,000,000.  Once  these  people  had  been  glad  to 
escape  the  Turkish  yoke  by  being  taken  into  the  Austrian 
dominions,  and  now  in  the  Dual  Monarchy  they  had  no 
little  prosperity  and  progress.  But  meanwhile,  Rumania 
and  Servia  had  grown  up,  and  in  course  of  time,  as  the 
Ruman  and  South  Slavic  subjects  of  Austria-Hungary 
saw  themselves  treated  as  inferiors  and  debarred  from 
equal  rights,  some  of  them  began  to  yearn  for  the  day 
when  they  might  be  united  with  their  brethren.  Thus 
the  statesmen  of  the  Dual  Monarchy  saw  it  threatened 
with  disintegration.  Just  before  the  Great  War,  it  is  said, 
the  ill-fated  Archduke  Franz  Ferdinand  cherished  the 
scheme  of  admitting  the  Slavs  to  a  partnership  with  Mag- 
yars and  Germans;  but  this  plan,  which  would  probably 
have  failed  to  cure  the  ills  of  the  state,  never  was  tried. 


The  Dual 
Monarchy 
and  the 
Balkan 
states 


446 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  former 
greatness  of 
Turkey 


Generally  it  had  seemed  best  to  the  leaders  to  pursue  an 
aggressive  policy,  and  try  to  control  the  small  neighboring 
states  in  the  Balkans,  and  thus  make  it  impossible  to  draw 
parts  of  the  monarchy  away.  A  good  understanding  was 
effected  with  Rumania  which  became  virtually  an  appen- 
dage of  the  Triple  Alliance.  For  some  time  very  friendly 
relations  were  established  with  Servia,  while  Russia  had 
great  influence  in  Bulgaria;  but  after  a  while  BvJgaria 
favored  the  Teutonic  powers,  and  Servia  came  under  the 
influence  of  Russia. 

The  history  of  the  Balkans  in  the  nineteenth  century 
is  largely  a  story  of  the  disintegration  of  the  Turkish 
Empire  in  Europe  and  the  establishment  of  separate  states 
from  its  ruins.  The  Turks,  who  three  centuries  before  had 
the  most  splendid  position  in  Europe  and  who  had  been 
dreaded  by  all  Christian  peoples,  were  now  weak  and 
declining,  and  would  undoubtedly  have  suffered  the  fate 
of  the  Poles  had  they  not  been  farther  removed  from  strong 
neighbors,  and  had  the  Great  Powers  not  been  too  jealous 
to  unite  to  despoil  them.  They  had  come  into  Europe 
from  Asia  Minor  in  the  fourteenth  century.  In  1361  they 
took  Adrianople;  in  1398  they  broke  the  power  of  Servia; 
and  soon  afterward  overran  Bulgaria  and  Wallachia. 
A  pitiful  remnant  of  the  Eastern  Roman  Empire  survived 
on  the  Bosporus,  but  in  1453  they  captured  Constanti- 
nople, which  was  thenceforth  the  center  of  their  power. 
Their  dominion  was  rapidly  extended  up  through  the  Bal- 
kans; Hungary  was  overrun;  and  turning  to  the  east  they 
subjected  the  Russians  and  the  Tartars  along  the  northern 
shore  of  the  Black  Sea.  For  a  while  they  were  the  great- 
est naval  power  in  the  world;  their  galleys  swept  the  east- 
ern Mediterranean;  they  conquered  the  islands  and  much 
of  the  north  African  shore.  In  1571  the  Christian  powers 
of  the  west  combined  to  defeat  them  in  the  great  naval 
battle  of  Lepanto,  and  this  was  in  fact  a  decisive  triumph; 
but  for  another  century  the  Ottoman  power  continued  to 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    447 


be  mighty  and  terrible  on  land.  The  king  of  Poland  was 
reduced  to  pay  tribute,  and  in  1683  Vienna  itself  was  be- 
sieged by  a  Turkish  host. 

The  foundations  of  this  mighty  structure  presently 
began  to  decay,  though  the  edifice  long  stood  erect  in  its 
splendor.  Gradually  the  vigor  of  the  rulers  declined 
amidst  the  pleasures  of  Constantinople;  and  the  Janis- 
saries, the  terrible  organized  mercenaries  who  had  so  long 
defeated  all  their  enemies,  fell  behind  rival  armies  in  dis- 
cipline and  equipment,  and  were  finally  able  to  inspire 
terror  only  in  the  Turkish  government  itself.  Moreover, 
the  Turks  had  never  perfected  any  strong  organization  in 
their  empire.  Always  deficient  in  political  ability,  they 
depended  on  force  and  chicane  for  holding  together  their 
dominions.  Like  the  Moiigols  once  in  Russia,  the  Turks 
ruled  their  Christian  subjects  in  the  Balkans  by  taking 
advantage  of  differences  in  race  and  religion  to  keep  them 
apart,  and  by  punishing  them  savagely  if  they  resisted  or 
failed  to  pay  tribute.  They  did  not  attempt  really  to 
incorporate  the  Servians,  the  Bulgarians,  the  Hungarians, 
and  the  Greeks  in  a  compact  Ottoman  Empire,  but  reduced 
them  to  serfdom  or  put  them  under  tribute,  otherwise  leav- 
ing them  largely  to  themselves,  so  long^as  they  continued 
submissive.  Always  the  Turks  were  a  minority  of  the  pop- 
ulation, and  so  far  as  they  lived  among  their  subjects  they 
lived  as  an  uppei^ruling^class,  never  winning  affection  or 
loyalty  or  gratitude  from  their  subjects,  and  never  mingling 
with  them  to  form  one  united  people.  Misgovernment 
and  oppression  of  the  subject  Christians  by  the  Turks 
proceeded  less  from  Turkish  brutality  than  from  incapacity. 
And  it  must  be  remembered  that  during  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries,  at  a  time  when  Catholics  in  Ire- 
land and  England  and  Protestants  in  the  Austrian  domin- 
ions suffered  under  disabilities  and  persecution,  the  Otto-  / 
man  Empire  allowed  the  greatest  measure  of  religiouf 
freedom  permitted  by  any  government  in  Europe,  anJthat 


Organiza- 
tion of  ths 
Ottoman 
power 


448 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


England, 
then  Austria, 
opposes 
Russia 


Christians  exercised  their  religion,  as  a  rule,  unmolested, 
and  were  freely  admitted  to  hold  office  in  the  state. 

Such  an  empire,  like  the  ancient  empires  of  the  east, 
could  be  held  together  only  so  long  as  its  military  organiza- 
tion remained  strong  enough  to  crush  all  rebellions  within 
and  meet  its  enemies  without.  During  the  sixteenth  and 
seventeenth  centuries  this  was  so,  but  the  turning  point 
came  in  1699,  when  by  the  Treaty  of  Carlowitz  the  Turks 
were  forced  to  yield  their  outlying  possessions  in  Hungary, 
in  Transylvania,  on  the  northeastern  Adriatic,  and  the 
Sea  of  Azov.  In  the  eigliteenth  century  the  Ottoman 
Empire  began  to  yield  before  Austria  and  Russia,  and  in 
the  nineteenth  it  began  to  break  up  from  within. 

In  the  days  of  their  greatness  the  Turks  had  been  a 
concern  and  a  danger  to  all  Europe,  though  the  protection 
of  Christian  Europe  usually  fell  to  Austria  alone.  During 
the  nineteenth  century,  while  the  strength  of  the  Turks  was 
ebbing,  their  European  provinces  became  the  great  danger 
spot  of  Europe,  because  of  rivalry  for  possession  of  the 
spoils.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century,  Rus- 
sia, expanding  southward,  took  Turkish  territories  north 
of  the  Black  Sea,  and  afterward  threatened  to  go  slowly 
forward  until  she  dominated  the  Balkans  and  arrived  at 
Constantinople.  Austria  was  much  interested  in  this, 
for  already  she  had  many  subjects  who  had  once  belonged 
to  Turkey,  and  expected  to  get  more;  but  at  first  she  was 
not  greatly  hostile  to  Russian  expansion,  and  in  1790  an 
arrangement  was  planned  by  which  the  Ottoman  domin- 
ions should  be  divided  between  Austria  and  Russia.  Eng- 
land, however,  already  dreaded  the  appearance  of  a  great 
European  power  on  the  ruins  of  Turkey,  and  exerted  her- 
self then,  as  afterward,  to  save  the  Ottoman  State  from 
destruction. 

During  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  England 
was  the  principal  supporter  of  Turkey,  and,  along  with 
France,  began  the  Crimean  War  in  1854  to  save  her  from 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    449 


Russian  aggression.  She  intervened  decisively  also  in 
1878  and  again  saved  Turkey  from  destruction.  But 
after  that  time  Austria  came  more  and  more  to  be  Russia's 
principal  opponent  in  the  Balkans,  dreading  the  extension 
of  Russian  power  southward.  During  much  of  this  time 
either  Russia  or  Austria  would  gladly  have  got  the  Otto- 
man provinces,  but  failing  that,  each  was  resolved  that 
no  other  power  should  get  them.  Gradually  it  was  recog- 
nized that  a  great  European  war  might  very  easily  grow 
out  of  attempted  aggrandizement  by  any  of  the  Great 
Powers  in  the  Balkans,  and  so  for  the  most  part  the 
Powers  exerted  themselves  to  preserve  the  Ottoman  state. 
It  was  due  almost  solely  to  this  that  Turkey  survived 
down  to  the  time  of  the  Great  War,  and  it  is  owing  To 
similar  rivalries  and  international  conditions  that  a  part 
of  her  still  remains. 

But  by  1914  only  a  remnant  of  Ottoman  power  existed 
in  Europe.  In  less  than  a  century  she  had  lost  all  her 
possessions  in  Ainca,  and  in  Europe  she  had  saved  only  a 
small  district  around  Constantinople.  The  principal  steps 
in  the  dismemberment  of  European  Turkey  since  the  time 
of  the  French  Revolution  were  the  Treaty  of  Adrianople 
between  Russia  and  Turkey  in  1829,  which  ended  the  War 
for  Greek  Independence;  the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano  and 
the  Congress  of  Berlin  which  brougHTto  an  end  the  strug- 
gle between  Russia  and  Turkey  in  1877-8;  and  the  Treaty 
of  London,  1913,  which  concluded  the  First  Balkan  War. 
All  of  the  crises  which  led  to  these  settlements  were  brought 
about  partly  because  of  misgovernment  and  oppression  of  —  lit«*A  ' 
Christian  subjects  by  the  Turkish  government,  partly 
because  of  the  indignation  which  this  aroused  either  in 
Russia  or  among  the  Balkan  peoples  themselves,  and 
partly  because  of  the  desire  of  Russia  or  Austria  at  first, 
and  later  of  the  Balkan  states,  to  seize  for  themselves 
what  was  slipping  away  from  the  weakening  grasp  of  the 
Turks. 


450 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


In  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  sub- 
merged peoples  of  Turkey  began  to  seek  their  freedom  at 
thesametimethat  the  Turkish  dominions  were  beginning  to 
crumble  from  internal  decay.  Ali  Pasha,  Pasha  of  Janina, 
first  made  himself  almost  independent  in  Albania,  then, 
as  governor  of  Rumelia,  began  to  intrigue  with  foreign 
powers.  In  1804_theSfirbs,  still  under  Turkish  rule,  began 
a  long  struggle  for  their  independence,  and  in  ISIX  some 
of  them  won  their  autonomy,  thus  making  the  foundation 
of  the  Servian  Kingdom. 

Meanwhile  the  Greeks  had  begun  a  struggle  which 
aroused  sympathy  all  over  Europe.  They  had,  indeed, 
been  treated  with  considerable  moderation,  and  in  the 
islands  of  the  iEgean  they  were  already  practically  in- 
dependent. They  had  retained  their  distinctive  character, 
and  the  spirit  of  Qationality  was  aroused  among  them  early 
in  the  nineteenth  century  by  revived  study  of  the  Greek 
classics  and  recollections  of  the  Hellas  of  old.  In  the 
Greek  Catholic  Church  they  had  a  strong  organization 
which  served  to  maintain  their  national  spirit  and  urge 
them  forward  to  obtain  their  independence.  In  1814  was 
founded  the  Hetairia  Philike  (friendly  union),  a  secret 
society  something  like  the  Carbonari  iii  Italy  later  on. 
Revolt  broke  out  in^l821.  It  was  led  by  Prince  Ypsilanti 
in  the  north  and  by  various  others  of  the  Hetairia  in  the 
Peloponnesus  or  Morea.  The  northern  movement  was 
broken  at  once,  but  in  the  south  the  Greeks  had  command 
of  the  sea,  and  a  long  struggle  inclined  in  their  favor.  In 
1824,  however,  the  Sultan  called  to  his  assistance  the  great 
Pasha,  Mehemet  Ali,  of  Egypt,  and  the  powerful  fleet 
which  was  now  brought  to  the  Turkish  side  soon  reduced 
the  Greeks  to  despair.  Unless  they  could  get  help  from 
abroad  it  was  apparent  that  their  cause  was  doomed. 
Volunteers  from  other  countries^-notable  among  whom 
was  the  English  poet.  Lord  Byron — enlisted  in  their  ser- 
vice, but  they  accomplished  little  of  importance. 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    451 


The  European  governments,  whatever  the  sympathies 
of  their  people,  were  at  first  reluctant  to  intervene,  because 
they  dreaded  any  disturbance  of  the  existing  arrangement 
in  Europe.  But  in  1823  Great JBritain  recognized  the 
belligerency  of  the  Greeks,  anJalready  the  sympathy  of  the 
Russian  people  had  been  stirred  profoundly,  though  the 
only  resuK  was  negotiations  which  dragged  on  and  led  to 
nothing.  In.  1827,  however,  the  combined  fleets  of  Engr 
land  and  France,  attempting  to  enforce^^truce  between 
the  Greeks  and  the  Turks,  destroyed  the  fleet  of  Me- 
hemet  Ali  at  Navarino.  The  Sultan  now  rashly  declared 
war,  and  a  Russian-army  entering  the  Balkans  pressed 
on  to  Constantinople  itself. 

By  the  Treaty__el_Adrianople  which  ended  the  war 
Turkey  practically  acknowledged  the  independence  of 
Greece,  which  was  defined  and  established  at  an  interna- 
tional conference  at  London  three  years  later.  At  the 
same  time  she  acknowledged  the  autonomy  of  Servia;  of 
Moldavia  and  Wallachia,  the  Danubian  principalities, 
which  became  a  Russian  protectorate;  and  gave  up  to 
Russia  such  claims  as  she  had  to  certain  districts  in  the 
Caucasus,  which  Russia  afterward  acquired  for  herself. 
Thus  by  the  settlement  of  1829  Turkey  lost  her  outlying 
European  provinces — Greece,  Servia,  and  what  was  after- 
ward the  Rumanian  Kingdom. 

The  old  conditions  continued  in  the  territory  left  to  her, 
for  in  the  midst  of  all  the  great  growth  and  changes  of  the 
nineteenth  century  the  Turks  changed  almost  not  at  all. 
There  were  the  same  stagnation,  inefliciency,  heavy  oppres- 
sion, and  lack  of  progress;  and  the  fierce  wildness  of  the 
rude  and  long-oppressed  Christian  population  was  sup- 
pressed from  time  to  time  by  outbursts  of  fearful  cruelty 
and  destruction.  About  1875  an  insurrection  broke  out 
in  Herzegovina,  a  district  to  the  west  of  Servia,  peopled 
by  Serbs,  but  still  under  Turkish  rule.  While  the  rebels 
were  being  encouraged  by  the  surrounding  states,  Mpnte- 


452 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


negro,  Austria,  and  Servia,  in  1876,  the  inhabitants  of 
Bulgaria — a  large  province  east  of  Servia  and  south  of  the 
Danube,  and  so  nearer  to  Constantinople  and  Turkish  op- 
pression— rose  against  the  Turks  also.  Servia  and  Mon- 
tenegro declared  war  on  Turkey,  and  great  sympathy  was 
aroused  in  Russia,  many  of  the  Tsar's  subjects  enlisting 
to  fight  as  volunteers.  Generally  the  Turks  were  success- 
ful, but  the  awful  atrocities  committed  by  them  upon 
the  Bulgarian  peasants  aroused  the  indignation  and 
horror  of  Europe,  especially  in  England,  where  Gladstone 
declared  that  the  Turks  must  be  expelled  "  bag  and  bag- 
gage" from  Europe,  and  in  Russia,  which  made  ready  to 
intervene. 

In  the  spring  of  1877  Russia  did  begin  war.  Rumania, 
declaring  now  complete  independence,  joined  her,  and  the 
allies  pushing  rapidly  southward  soon  got  the  passes  of 
the  Balkan  Mountains  which  were  the  gateway  into  the 
country.  At  Plevna,  in  northern  Bulgaria,  where  a  net- 
work of  highways  converged,  Osman  Pasha,  an  able 
Turkish  commander,  fortified  himself  to  oppose  them.  The 
allies  had  not  suflScient  forces  completely  to  mask  this 
fortress  and  also  advance  against  Constantinople,  but  for 
some  time  they  were  unable  to  take  it.  In  December, 
however,  Plevna  fell,  after  a  memorable  siege.  In  another 
month  the  Russians  had  pushed  on  and  taken  Adrianople, 
and  Constantinople  itself  would  have  fallen  except  for  the 
rising  jealousy  of  Austria  and  above  all  the  determined 
hostility  of  Great  Britain.  None  the  less,  in  March  1878, 
the  Turks  concluded  with  Russia  the  Treaty  of  San  Ste- 
fano,  by  which  at  last  was  acknowledged  the  complete 
independence  of  Montenegro  and  Servia,  to  whom  some 
territory  was  yielded;  and  almost  all  of  Turkey's  European 
territory,  except  for  a  small  area  including  Adrianople  and 
the  capital  and  another  area  in  Albania  on  the  Adriatic, 
was  given  to  a  new  Bulgaria,  autonomous  but  tributary 
to  the  Sultan. 


\  KUSSIA 


IONIAN 
SEA 


.  .  ,  TurcoSerbian  and  Turco- 
^        Wontenegrian  Boundaries 

Bulgaria 

Scale  of  Miles 
0       V  50  100  150 

GENERAL  DRAFTING  CO.INC.N.Y 


Rhodes 


MEDITERRANEAN 


SEA 


19.    THE  TREATY  OF  SAN  STEFANO 
453 


\  ^~\  RUSSIA 

^Bud«p«tt  ^*  \  ^ 

HJU    H    G    A    R    Y    '"xmoldaviaN '^^ 


SLAVONI i 


20.    THE  BALKAjNfS  IN  1878 
454 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    455 


This  would  have  made  Bulgaria  the  most  important 
state  in  the  Balkans,  and  for  some  time,  doubtless,  she 
would  have  been  largely  dependent  on  Russia.  But  owing 
to  the  efforts  of  Austria  and  Great  Britain  this  treaty  was 
almost  at  once  undone  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  which 
reduced  Bulgaria  and  restored  to  the  Sultan  much  of  what 
he  had  lost,  though  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  were  put 
under  the  administration  of  Austria-Hungary.  The  result 
of  this  was  that  Turkey,  though  considerably  reduced,  still 
stretched  from  the  Black  Sea  to  the  Adriatic  Sea  and  still 
rested  on  the  iEgean,  and  she  continued  the  foremost 
power  in  the  Near  East. 

The  decline  and  decay  of  Turkey  continued,  although 
after  1876  she  was  ruled  by  Abdul  Hamid,  a  man  of  sinister 
and  evil  reputation,  but  subtle  and  skilful  in  upholding 
Turkey  by  playing  upon  the  rivalries  of  the  powers. 
Meanwhile  the  new  Balkan  states  were  growing  in  ex- 
perience and  strength  and  beginning  to  hope  for  the  day 
when  the  complete  break-up  of  the  Ottoman  power  would 
enable  them  to  become  greater  still. 

In  1908  Austria-Hungary  annexed  Bosnia  and  Herze- 
govina; and  Bulgaria  declared  her  complete  independence. 
In  1911  Italy,  which  had  at  last  acquiesced  in  French  pos- 
session of  Tunis  and  approved  French  expansion  in  Mo- 
rocco on  condition  that  France  make  no  objection  to 
Italian  occupation  of  what  was  left  to  take  east  of  Tunis, 
suddenly  seized  Tripoli,  and  although  a  long  and  exhaust- 
ing struggle  was  maintained  by  the  tribesmen  in  their 
deserts,  supported  by  officers  from  Turkey,  yet  the  Otto- 
man government  was  in  1912  compelled  to  yield  its  last 
African  possession.  This  incident  was  of  much  impor- 
tance in  the  large  changes  of  these  years.  The  German 
government  strongly  disapproved  of  this  attack  on  its 
friend,  but  could  not  hinder  its  ally.  On  the  other  hand 
both  England  and  France  encouraged  and  approved,  and 
it  was  evident  that  Italy  would  be  loath  now  to  offend 


The  Treaty 
of  Berlin, 
1878 


Continued 
decline  of 
Turkey 


456 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The    Turks, 
Macedonia, 
and  the 
Balkan 
■totes 


these  powers,  since  they  controlled  the  Mediterranean  Sea, 
and  because  only  with  their  good  will  could  Italy  keep  her 
p)ossession. 

European  Turkey  had  shrunk  to  small  size  in  Europe, 
but  the  old  evils  of  misgovernment  continued  as  they 
always  had  been.     The  Turks  had  been  brave  and  admir- 
able soldiers,  and  under  favorable  circumstances  they  had 
revealed  a  character  pleasant  and  with  noble  traits.     But 
they  never  mastered  the  art  of  organizing  and  governing 
well.     They  were  often  tricked  and  deceived  by  their  sub- 
jects, but  in  last  recourse  their  method  was  to  employ 
dull,  stupid,  and  brutal  force,  and  with  greatest  cruelty 
compel  submission.     In  the  country  left  to  them  outside 
Constantinople  their  subjects  were  still  oppressed  with 
ruinous  and  foolish  taxes,  and  still  treated  with  inferiority 
and  contempt.     In  the  western  district,  the  mountainous 
country  of  Albania,  Turkish  authority  was  defied;  but  in 
Macedonia  and  Thrace  the  people  groaned  under  grievous 
misrule.     The  people  of  Macedonia  especially  were  Serv- 
ians, Greeks,  and  above  all  Bulgarians,  mingled  together. 
They  often  looked  with  longing  eyes  to  their  brethren  in 
Servia,  Greece,  and  Bulgaria,  over  the  borders;  and  always 
the  governments  of  these  countries,  especially  Bulgaria, 
looked  forward  to  the  day  when,  on  the  dissolution  of  Tur- 
key, these  populations  would  be  incorporated  in  the  greater 
Balkan  states  of  the  future.     Ceaselessly  agents  from  over 
the  border  tried  to  stir  up  the  Christians  of  the  Turkish 
country  to  be  ready  for  the  day  of  deliverance,  and  always 
they  tried  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  incorporation  of  as 
many  of  them  as  possible  in  their  respective  countries. 
These  three  little  nations  hated  with  a  great  hatred  the 
Turk,  who  had  once  oppressed  their  fathers,  but  so  great 
had  their  own  rivalries  become,  that  in  the  earlier  years 
of  the  twentieth  century  they  hated  each  other  still  more. 
It  was  accordingly  an  extraordinary  diplomatic  triumph 
and  a  great  surprise  to  the  rest  of  Europe,  when,  after 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    457 


secret  negotiation,  early  in  1912,  Bulgaria,  Servia,  Monte- 
-negrOj^and  Greece  concluded  an  arrangement  by  which 
they  agreed  to  act  together.  This  agreement,  it  is  be- 
lieved, was  largely  the  work  of  the  great  Greek  statesman, 
Venizelos. 

In  1908  the  Ottoman  government  had  been  overthrown 
by  a  revolution.  The  new  leaders,  the  Young  Turks, 
strove  to  reform  the  government  and  restore  the  vigor  and 
power  of  the  state.  Actually,  in  the  end  it  seemed  that 
they  did  more  harm  than  good.  They  soon  undertook 
a  policy  of  nationalization,  attempting  to  assimilate  their 
various  subjects.  So,  they  withdrew  privileges  from  the 
Christian  peoples  in  Macedonia,  and  began  bringing  Mo- 
hammedans in.  This  led  to  disorder,  massacre,  and  re- 
prisal. The  Balkan  states,  desired  that  this  come  to  an 
end.  In  the  autumn  the  Turks  concentrated  some  of  their 
best  troops  north  of  Adrianople  for  maneuvers.  Im- 
mediately the  four  Balkan  states  issued  simultaneous 
orders  for  mobilization,  after  which  the  Turks  ordered 
mobilization  next  day.  It  was  evident  now  that  the  little 
states  of  the  peninsula,  encouraged  by  the  example  of 
Italy,  were  really  willing  to  go  to  war.  The  Great  Powers 
in  much  alarm  endeavored,  too  late,  to  prevent  a  conflict. 
But  Montenegro  immediately  declared  war.  October  14th, 
Servia,  Bulgaria,  and  Greece  presented  an  ultimatum  to 
Turkey,  and  the  next  day  fighting  began.  Such  was  the 
beginning  of  the  First  Balkan  War. 

Turkey  was  known  to  be  in  the  latter  stages  of  decay; 
but  the  Turks  had  always  been  brave,  steady  fighters. 
Weak  though  their  state  might  be,  it  was  supposed  that 
their  army,  organized  and  trained  by  Germans,  was  still 
in  fair  shape;  it  was  believed  to  be  greatly  superior  to 
the  military  force  which  the  Balkan  powers  could  assemble 
against  it.  But  the  four  Balkan  armies  moved  forward  at 
once,  and  struck  a  series  of  terrible  blows  by  which  the 
power  of  Turkey  in  Europe  was  ruined.    The  little  Mon- 


Causes  of 
the  First 
Balkan  War 


The    Balkan 
allies  vic- 
torious 


458 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Great 
▼ictories 
of  the 

Bulgars 


The  London 
Conference 


End  of  tht 
First  Balkan 
War 


tenegrin  army  advanced  southward  and  laid  siege  to 
Scutari.  The  Servians  defeated  the  Turks  at  Kumanovo, 
overran  part  of  Macedonia,  presently  captured  a  large 
Turkish  force  in  the  stronghold  of  Monastir,  and  even 
crossed  Albania  and  reached  the  Adriatic  at  Durazzo. 
The  Greeks  at  once  got  control  of  the  ^gean  Sea,  the  task 
which  had  been  assigned  them,  and,  in  addition,  moved 
their  army  rapidly  forward,  pushing  the  Turks  back  and 
driving  some  of  them  into  the  fortress  of  Janina,  and  some 
into  the  seaport  of  Salonica. 

Meanwhile  the  greatest  tasks  were  being  done  by  the 
Bulgars.  To  them  had  been  assigned  the  work  of  holding 
the  main  Turkish  forces  in  Thrace.  At  once  they  moved 
down  upon  the  principal  fortress,  Adrianople,  sacred  in 
the  eyes  of  the  Turks,  and  key  to  the  Thracian  plain. 
Near  by  they  encountered  a  Turkish  army,  which  was 
defeated  at  Kirk-Kilisseh,  and  driven  from  the  field  in 
total  rout.  A  week  later  they  destroyed  the  military 
power  of  the  Turks  in  a  greater  and  more  desperate  battle 
at  Lille-Burgas.  Thrace  was  now  cleared,  and  the  Bul- 
garians advancing  swiftly  in  triumph  were  stopped  only 
by  the  famous  fortifications  of  the  Tchataldja  lines,  which 
protect  Constantinople,  and  had  in  days  of  need  long  before 
often  halted  invaders  from  the  north. 

Within  six  weeks  Turkish  power  in  Europe  had  been 
destroyed.  The  Turks  had  been  defeated  in  all  the  great 
battles  and  had  lost  command  of  the  sea.  The  relics  of 
their  forces  had  been  driven  down  upon  Constantinople, 
or  were  hopelessly  shut  up  in  the  beleaguered  fortresses  of 
Adrianople,  Scutari,  and  Janina.  The  Turks  asked  for  an 
armistice,  and  a  peace  conference  assembled  in  London. 

This  conference  between  the  Turks  and  their  foes  was 
soon  broken  off,  and  at  the  beginning  of  February  hostil- 
ities were  again  begun.  The  Bulgarian  troops  at  Tcha- 
taldja were  not  able  to  force  the  Turkish  lines  and  take 
Constantinople,  but  no  more  were  the  Turks  able  to  drive 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    459 


them  away.  Meanwhile  the  Greeks  took  Janina,  and 
the  Bulgarians  Adrianople.  The  Great  Powers  had  al- 
ready proposed  mediation.  On  April  19th  an  armistice  was 
signed  and  at  the  end  of  May  a  treaty  made  whereby  an 
Albania  was  to  be  constituted  by  the  powers,  and  the  Turks 
were  to  keep  a  small  district  outside  of  Constantinople; 
otherwise  what  had  belonged  to  Turkey  in  Europe  was  to 
go  to  the  victorious  Balkan  states.  This  would  probably 
meet  the  wishes  of  Greece  and  Bulgaria,  provided  they 
could  agree  among  themselves,  but  it  debarred  Servia  and 
Montenegro  from  getting  a  great  part  of  what  they  ex- 
pected, on  the  shores  of  the  Adriatic,  in  Albania.  Servia 
yielded,  because  of  the  injunctions  of  the  Great  Powers 
and  because  she  hoped  for  compensation  elsewhere,  but 
Montenegro,  bent  on  having  possession  of  Scutari,  con- 
tinued the  siege  of  that  mountain  stronghold,  and,  after 
prodigies  of  valor,  captured  it.  Presently,  however,  the 
threats  of  the  powers  compelled  her  to  give  it  up  again. 

A  second  Balkan  War  soon  followed.  This  struggle 
was  directly  the  result  of  the  decision  of  the  powers  not  to 
permit  Servia,  Montenegro,  or  Greece  to  take  territory  in 
Albania,  and  this  had  been  done  because  of  the  insistence 
of  Austria  that  an  Albania  must  be  maintained.  It  had  in 
the  first  place  seemed  almost  inconceivable  that  the  Bal- 
kan states  with  their  bitter  rivalries  would  be  able  to  act 
In  alliance,  but  they  had  carefully  agreed  beforehand 
what  each  should  have,  provided  they  defeated  Turkey, 
and  it  is  possible  that  if  there  had  been  no  interference  they 
might  have  divided  the  spoils  without  fighting.  Now 
that  they  were  forbidden  to  touch  Albanian  territory, 
however,  Servia  demanded  that  the  agreement  of  1912  be 
revised  so  as  to  give  her  compensation  elsewhere,  but 
a  week  later  this  was  refused.  Savage  fighting  had  al- 
ready broken  out  between  Bulgarians  and  Servians  and 
Greeks.  At  the  end  of  June,  suddenly,  without  any 
declaration  of  war,  the  Bulgarian  armies  attacked  the 


Treaty  of 

London, 

1913 


The  Second 
Balkan  War, 
1913 


466 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Btilgaria 
over- 
whelmed 


The    Treaty 
of  Bucha- 
rest, 1913 


The  relics 
of  the 
Ottoman 
•Ute 


Montenegro 


Servian  and  the  Greek  forces,  and  a  few  days  later  Monte- 
negro, Servia,  and  Greece  declared  war  on  the  Bulgars. 

It  is  probable  that  the  Teutonic  powers  had  encouraged 
Bulgaria  to  resist  the  Servian  demand,  and  it  is  certain 
that  they  expected  her  to  win  easy  triumph,  just  as  they 
had  expected  a  Turkish  victory  the  preceding  autumn. 
They  were  grievously  mistaken.  Neither  the  Greeks  nor 
the  Servians  were  overwhelmed,  but  began  driving  the 
Bulgarians  back  before  them.  And  while  this  struggle 
was  being  waged,  with  inconceivable  atrocities  on  both 
sides,  the  doom  of  Bulgaria  was  sealed  by  unexpected  ac- 
tion of  the  Rumanian  government.  Rumania  suddenly 
demanded  that  Bulgaria  cede  a  strip  of  territory  on  her 
southern  border;  and  when  this  was  refused  her  powerful 
army  was  moved  down  upon  the  Bulgarian  capital  while 
the  Greeks  and  the  Servians  were  advancing  from  other 
sides.  At  the  same  time  the  Turks  reoccupied  Adria- 
nople.  The  King  of  Bulgaria  threw  himself  upon  the  mercy 
of  his  foes.  In  August  the  stern  Treaty  of  Bucharest  was 
imposed,  by  which  Bulgaria  lost  most  of  what  her  great 
victories  had  gained  from  the  Turks;  Rumania  took  that 
which  she  had  demanded ;  Servia  and  Greece  got  the  terri- 
tories which  they  had  taken  in  the  First  Balkan  War,  while 
Bulgaria  was  engaging  the  main  Turkish  forces. 

The  Jesuit  of  the  two  Balkan  wars  was  that  to  Turkey 
in  Europe  there  were  left  only  Constantinople  and  a  small 
area  of  territory  northward.  Steadily  the  state  sank  lower 
into  feebleness,  decrepitude,  and  ruin,  while  foreign  capital- 
ists and  diplomatic  agents  came  in  to  intrigue  and  control. 
Turkey  had  drifted  away  from  the  old  friendship  with 
Britain,  and  become  more  and  more  dependent  on  the  Ger- 
mans, so  that  at  the  beginning  of  the  Great  War  she  was 
brought  into  the  struggle  to  aid  the  German  Empire 
almost  like  a  vassal  state. 

Of  the  Balkan  countries  the  oldest  was  Montenegro, 
whose  hardy  population  of  rude  mountaineers  had  never 


21.    THE  BALKANS  IN  1913 
461 


462 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Servia, 
1817-78 


Rival 

dynasties 


been  entirely  conquered  by  the  Turks.  Her  complete 
independence  was  formally  acknowledged  by  the  Treaty 
of  SwTStefano,  and  by  the  Congress  of  Berlin  i^  1878. 
The  people  were  Serbs,  closely  related  to  the  population 
of  Servia.  Owing  to  the  good  offices  of  England  an  mitfet 
was  procured  for  them  in  1880  on  the  Adriatic,  at  Dulcigno. 
The  government  was  in  theory  a  constitutional  monarchy, 
but  actually  the  prince  was  a  patriarch  and  leader  of  a 
tribal  people. 

Next  in  age  was  Servia,  which  got  autonomous  govern- 
ment in  1817*  this  autonomy  being  recognized  more  form- 
ally in  the  Treaty  of  Adrianople  in  J^29.  In  1804  the 
struggle  for  freedom  had  been  begun  by  a  peasant  leader, 
Kara  (Black)  George,  the  father  of  Servian  independence. 
After  successful  guerilla  warfare  in  the  mountains  he  com- 
pletely overwhelmed  the  Turks  at  Mischoz  in  1806.  For  a 
few  years  the  Turks  granted  virtual  autonomy,  but  when 
Russia,  the  patron  of  the  Balkan  Slavs  was  occupied  in  the 
great  struggle  with  Napoleon,  the  Sultan  again  reduced 
the  country.  Presently,  however,  the  Servians  rose  under 
another  peasant  leader,  Milosh  Obrenovitch,  and  Russia 
being  free  to  intervene  again,  the  Sultan  yielded  once 
more.    Complete  independence  was  acknowledged  in  1878. 

The  circumstances  oT^^  Servian  war  of  liberation 
were  unfortunate  in  that  freedom  was  got  through  the 
efforts  of  two  leaders  both  of  whose  families  now  desired 
to  rule,  with  the  result  that  the  country  was  torn  by  family 
and  dynastic  disputes  like  the  feuds  of  Irish  princes  in  the 
Middle  Ages.  In  a  country  of  peasants,  where  tribal  in- 
stincts were  still  very  strong,  it  would,  in  any  event,  have 
been  diflScult  to  avoid  this.  In  1817  Kara  George  was 
assassinated  so  that  the  Obrenovitch  family  might  rule. 
This  was  avenged  in  1868  when  Michael  III  was  assassin- 
ated by  partisans  of  the  Karageorgevich  House,  and  in 
1903  when  they  murdered  Alexander  and  his  queen.  The 
Obrenovitch  Dynasty  was  now  extinct,  and  the  throne 


Austria 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    46S 

came  finally  into  the  possession  of  the  House  of  Kara 
George. 

In  foreign  relations  Servia  long  remained  dependent  on  Servia, 
Austria,  who  supported  and  protected  her  in  her  rash  war  ?"^i*'  ^^ 
with  Bulgaria  in  1886,  in  which  she  was  badly  defeated  at 
Slivnitsa.  But  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  eight  years  before, 
Austria-Hungaryhad  been  given  the  administration  of  Bos- 
nia and  Herzegovina,  in  which  dwelt  a  large  part  of  the 
Servian  race.  As  time  went  on  Servia  greatly  hoped  some 
day  to  obtain  these  provinces  for  herself.  Accordingly  the 
friendship  with  Austria  gradually  cooled,  and  Servia  getting 
more  and  more  under  Russian  influence  strove  to  free  her- 
self from  economic  dependence  on  her  neighbor  to  the  north. 
In  1908,  when  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  were  annexed  by 
the  Dual  Monarchy,  and  the  last  chance  of  Servia  acquir- 
ing them  seemed  to  have  gone,  the  Servians  were  filled 
with  the  rage  of  despair,  and  apparently  hoped  to  be  able 
to  fight  along  with  Russia  as  an  ally.  When  Russia  yielded 
to  Austria  and  Germany  together,  it  seemed  for  a  moment 
that  Servia  would  strike  by  herself,  but  she  also  yielded 
and  was  compelled  to  accept  what  had  been  done.  In 
1912  she  helped  to  form  the  Balkan  Alliance  which  dis- 
membered Turkey.  She  overcame  all  opposition  and  even 
got  the  long-desired  outlet  on  the  sea  at  Durazzo.  But 
Austria-Hungary,  unwilling  that  Servia  should  grow  great 
or  even  have  a  port  on  the  Adriatic,  compelled  her  to 
withdraw  from  Albania.  She  did,  indeed,  at  this  time 
yield  to  Servia  the  Sanjak  (province)  of  Novi-Bazar, 
which  lay  between  Servia  and  Montenegro,  and  which  she 
had  undertaken  to  administer  when  she  got  possession  of 
Bosnia.  None  the  less,  the  Servians,  cheated  of  the  fruits 
of  their  victory,  turned  for  compensation  to  the  east,  and 
this  helped  to  bring  on  the  Second  Balkan  War.  In  this 
struggle  Servia  and  Greece  defeated  Bulgaria,  and,  as  a 
result  of  the  Treaty  of  Bucharest,  Servia,  although  terribly 
weakened,  was  left  with  greatly  increased  territory  and 


464 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Domestic 
affairs 


Greece, 
1829-32 


Foreign 
relations 


prestige.  In  1915,  during  the  Great  War,  she  was  de- 
stroyed by  her  enemies,  but  part  of  her  army  escaped  and 
**  afterward  assisted  the  Allies  in  their  final  triumph,  as  a 
result  of  which  Servia  was  made  the  leader  of  a  great  fed- 
eration of  South  Slavs,  based  upon  the  eastern  Adriatic  Sea. 

The  domestic  history  of  the  country  records  the  long, 
slow  rise  of  the  peasants  to  better  economic  conditions. 
The  principal  occupations  of  the  people  were  agriculture 
and  the  raising  of  cattle.  Generally  speaking  the  land  was 
in  the  hands  of  small  peasant  proprietors,  who  lived  a 
rude,  hard  life  but  enjoyed  more  economic  independence 
than  most  of  the  peasants  outside  of  France,  and  of  Ire- 
land after  the  Land  Purchase  Acts.  The  government  was 
vested  in  a  prince,  until  1882,  when  the  title  of  king  was 
assumed.  There  was  a  legislature,  the  Skupshtina;  and 
for  some  years  before  the  war  a  considerable  measure  of 
constitutional  self-government  had  been  developed.  The 
religion  of  the  people  is  the  Greek  Catholic  faith. 

For  ages  the  fate  of  Greece  has  been  closely  associated 
with  that  of  Turkey  and  the  Balkans.  The  Greeks  ob- 
tained their  freedom  in  1829,  about  the  same  time  that  the 
Servians  did.  When  Turkey  had  abandoned  her  claims 
there  was  some  delay  about  fixing  the  status  of  the  coun- 
try. Russia  desired  that  she  have  self-government  and 
remain  tributary  to  the  Sultan,  but  since  it  was  believed 
that  this  would  make  her  really  dependent  on  Russia, 
Austria  and  England  urged  that  Greece  be  established  as  a 
sovereign  and  independent  state.  This  was  done  in  1832 
as  the  result  of  an  international  conference  held  at  London, 
and  in  the  next  year  a  Bavarian  prince.  Otto,  was  called 
to  the  throne.  Increasing  unpopularity  caused  his  deposi- 
tion in  1862,  after  which  a  Danish  prince  was  invited  to 
rule  the  country. 

In  her  foreign  relations  Greece  was  generally  fortunate. 
In  1862  the  British  government  gave  her  the  Ionian  Islands 
which  lay  just  oflP  the  west  coast,  and  which  England  had 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    465 

got  during  the  Napoleonic  Wars;  and  at  the  Congress  of 
Berlin  her  northern  boundaries  were  extended.  In  1897, 
during  a  rebellion  in  the  large  Greek-inhabited  island  of 
Crete,  Greece  declared  war  on  Turkey,  but  was  at  once 
overwhelmed  and  would  have  lost  some  of  her  territory  in 
the  north  except  for  prompt  intervention  by  the  powers. 
None  the  less  the  Cretans,  who  had  repeatedly  risen  in 
rebellion  since  the  time  of  the  Greek  War  of  Independence, 
were  now  given  autonomy  under  Turkey.  In  1905,  under 
their  leader,  Venizelos,  the  greatest  Greek  of  his  genera- 
tion, they  declared  for  union  with  Greece,  and  five  years 
later  the  Treaty  of  London  at  the  end  of  the  First  Balkan 
War  brought  this  about.  In  the  First  Balkan  War,  the 
Greeks  got  command  of  the  sea,  occupied  such  islands 
in  the  ^gean  as  Italy  had  not  taken  the  year  before,  and, 
defeating  the  Turkish  armies  opposed  to  her,  got  the  long- 
coveted  city  of  Salonica.  In  the  second  war,  she  helped 
Servia  to  defeat  Bulgaria,  and  kept  what  she  had  won. 
During  the  Great  War  Venizelos  would  have  had  her  join 
the  Allies,  but  the  sympathy  of  the  sovereign  was  with 
Germany,  and  for  a  long  time  Greece  remained  neutral. 
The  Allies  occupied  Salonica,  and  in  1917  a  revolution  drove 
the  king  out,  whereupon  Greece  entered  the  war  with 
England  and  France.  In  1920  during  the  settlement  of 
European  affairs,  at  Paris,  Greece  received  considerable 
portions  of  Turkish  territory  along  the  iEgean  and  up 
beyond  Adrianople  and  also  in  Asia  Minor. 

The  domestic  history  of  the  country  during  this  period  Domestic 
has  no  great  general  interest.  The  people  are  descended  *^*^s 
from  the  ancient  Hellenes,  though  their  forefathers  mingled 
with  the  Slavic  intruders  who  came  into  the  peninusla  in 
the  early  Middle  Ages.  Their  language  is  a  modification 
of  the  Greek  spoken  by  the  countrymen  of  Aristotle  and 
Pericles.  Indeed,  modern  Greek  is  much  more  like  the 
Greek  of  classical  times  than  modern  English  is  Hke  Anglo- 
Saxon.     The  people  belong  to  the  Greek  Catholic  Church. 


466  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

The  government  is  a  constitutional  monarchy.  The  people 
continued  the  traditions  of  old  Greece  and  developed  much 
commerce  and  shipping,  but  the  country  has  been  poor  and 
opportunity  small,  and  large  numbers  of  emigrants  have 
left  the  homeland. 

Rumania,  Rumania  dates  from  about  the  time  when  Greece  was 

1829-61-78  established.  By  the  Treaty  of  Adrianople  in  1829  the 
Danubian  principalities,  Moldavia  and  Wallachia,  were 
left  under  the  nominal  sovereignty  of  the  Sultan,  but 
actually  autonomous  and  largely  dependent  on  Russia, 
who  had  gained  them  their  freedom.  Russian  control  of 
the  country,  which  commanded  the  mouths  of  the  Danube, 
awakened  the  jealousy  of  Austria,  and  in  1856  at  the 
Congress  of  Paris  the  principalities  were  formally  declared 
autonomous  states  under  Turkish  suzerainty  and  the 
Russian  protectorate  abolished,  while  at  the  same  time 
Bessarabia,  formerly  an  eastern  part  of  Moldavia,  lying 
across  the  Danube,  and  taken  by  Russia  from  Turkey  in 
1812,  was  restored  to  Moldavia  once  more.  The  constit- 
uent assemblies  summoned  in  the  two  provinces  declared 
for  union  in  one  state,  but  this  was  opposed  by  England 
who  feared  Russia,  and  by  Austria  who  wanted  no  strong 
Rumanian  state  right  on  the  border  of  her  province  of 
Transylvania,  which  was  peopled  by  Rumans.  None  the 
less,  the  people  of  the  two  principalities  proceeded  to  elect 
the  same  prince,  Alexander  Couza,  and,  supported  by 
^  Napoleon  III,  who  at  this  very  time  was  making  war  upon 

Austria  to  assist  Italian  nationality,  they  were  united. 
This  union  was  sanctioned  by  Turkey  in  1861.  The  great 
reforms  which  Couza  undertook  raised  enemies  who  drove 
him  from  his  throne  five  years  later.  He  was  succeeded 
by  a  German  prince,  Charles  of  Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, 
in  whose  long  reign  the  country  went  forward  in  develop- 
ment and  progress. 

Foreign  With  Russia  Rumania  made  war  upon  Turkey  in  1877, ; 

affairs  ^^j^j  j^^^  soldiers  won  great  distinction;  but  she  gained 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    467 


nothing,  for  in  the  settlement  which  followed  Russia  took 
back  Bessarabia  and  gave  the  less  valuable  Dobrudja 
to  the  south,  which  had  just  been  taken  from  Turkey. 
But  the  complete  independence  of  Rumania  was  recognized 
by  the  Treaty  of  Berlin,  and  in  1881  her  ruler  assumed  the 
title  of  king.  Rumania  took  no  part  in  the  First  Balkan 
War,  but  intervened  decisively  in  the  Second,  and  by  the 
Treaty  of  Bucharest  got  a  small  portion  of  Bulgarian  terri- 
tory. During  the  Great  War,  like  Italy  and  Greece,  she 
maintained  neutrality  for  some  time,  but  in  1916  she 
joined  the  Allies.  After  a  brief  struggle  she  was  over- 
whelmed, and  presently  forced  to  make  an  ignominious 
peace  and  see  her  country  stripped  bare.  But  two  years 
later  her  enemies  were  completely  overthrown  and  in  the 
general  settlement  of  European  affairs  at  Paris,  she  obtained 
what  she  had  so  long  hoped  for  Transylvania,  Romania 
Irredenta^  and  proceeded  to  take  back  Bessarabia  also. 

The  domestic  history  of  the  country  reveals  steady  de- 
velopment and  increase  in  material  prosperity.  Even  be- 
fore her  latest  acquisitions  Rumania  was  the  largest  and 
most  populous  of  the  Balkan  states;  she  was  rich  in  re- 
sources, was  one  of  the  great  wheat-  and  oil-producing 
districts  of  Europe,  and  had  a  trade  almost  as  great  as 
that  of  the  other  Balkan  states  combined.  After  the  set- 
tlement at  Parife  and  the  taking  of  Bessarabia  her  size  was 
nearly  doubled,  and  she  became  greater  and  more  impor- 
tant than  her  neighbors,  Austria,  Hungary,  or  any  of  the 
Balkan  states.  Rumania  was  free  from  the  uprisings  and 
violent  overturns  which  interfered  with  the  development 
of  neighboring  states.  Constitutional  monarchy  was 
established  but  a  restricted  franchise  kept  control  in  the 
hands  of  the  upper  classes.  Under  Alexander  Couza  a 
series  of  notable  reforms  was  made;  the  property  of  the 
monasteries  was  confiscated,  and  part  of  the  holdings  of 
the  great  landowners  was  sold  to  the  peasants,  who  at  the 
saijtie  time  were  relieved  of  the  more  onerous  of  the  feudal 


Domestic 
affairs 


Prince 

Alexander 

Couza 


468 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  Bulgars 


Bulgaria, 
1878-1908 


or  manorial  obligations.  These  changes,  which  were 
carried  through  just  about  the  time  when  Alexander  II 
was  making  his  great  reform  for  the  Russian  serfs,  partly 
failed  in  the  end  largely  for  the  same  reasons  as  in  Russia. 
The  amount  of  land  given  to  the  peasants  was  small,  and 
since  the  population  increased  rapidly,  after  a  while  the 
amount  was  insufficient.  Furthermore,  some  of  the  feudal 
obligations  were  left  upon  the  peasants,  such  obligations 
lingering  in  Rumania  longer  than  anywhere  else  in  Europe. 
The  result  was  that  while  the  wealth  and  prosperity  of  the 
country  increased,  it  was  largely  for  the  upper  classes. 
The  mass  of  the  people  were  poor,  and  agrarian  discontent 
very  great.  During  the  period  of  the  Great  War,  how- 
ever, large  estates  were  divided  among  the  peasants  and 
universal  suffrage  was  granted.  The  people  claim  descent 
from  Roman  colonists  of  the  time  of  Trajan,  and  their  lan- 
guage is  an  offspring  of  the  Latin ;  but  most  of  the  people 
are  Slavic  and  most  of  them  adherents  of  the  Greek  Ortho- 
dox Church. 

Youngest  of  the  Balkan  states  was  Bulgaria.  The  Bul- 
garians like  the  Servians,  had  long  before  been  formidable 
enemies  of  the  Eastern  Roman  Empire  in  the  days  of  the 
empire's  decline,  and  both  founded  great  states  in  the 
Balkan  peninsula  during  the  Middle  Ages.  Both  of  them 
were  afterward  overwhelmed  by  the  Turks,  and  spent 
long  ages  in  dumb  and  hapless  subjection.  Because  of 
their  rivalry  and  disputes  the  Turks  had  found  it  easy  to 
conquer  them,  and  afterward  play  them  off  against  each 
other. 

In  1876  the  Bulgarian  peasants  rose  against  their  Turk- 
ish masters.  The  revolt  was  easily  suppressed,  but  with 
such  infamous  cruelty  that  all  of  Europe  was  aroused. 
In  1877  Russia,  moved  partly  by  ambition  to  extend 
her  influence  toward  Constantinople  but  also  because  of 
sincere  sympathy  for  her  kinsmen,  declared  war  upon 
Turkey.     In  the  next  year,  by  the  Treaty  of  Berlin,  the 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    469 


Bulgarian  country  was  divided  into  three  parts,  the  south- 
ernmost, Macedonia,  which  contained  many  Bulgarian 
people,  was  left  to  the  Turks;  the  middle  part.  Eastern 
Rumelia,  was  made  an  autonomous  province  under  a 
Christian  governor,  but  also  under  the  direct  authority  of 
Turkey  in  mihtary  and  political  matters;  while  the  north- 
ern part,  v/as  made  into  the  autonomous  principality  of 
Bulgaria  tributary  to  the  Sultan.  Part  of  this  enforced 
division  was  soon  undone.  In  1885  Eastern  Rumelia 
joined  Bulgaria.  Greece  and  Servia  were  unwilling  to  see 
their  new  rival  strengthened,  and  Servia  suddenly  attacked 
her.  But  the  Bulgarians  completely  defeated  their  en- 
emies at  Slivnitsa,  and  the  union  was  achieved. 

The  first  ruler  of  the  country  was  a  German,  Prince 
Alexander  of  Battenberg,  but  after  a  troublous  reign  of 
seven  years  he  withdrew  from  the  country,  and  presently 
another  German,  Prince  Ferdinand  of  Saxe-Coburg  was 
chosen.  For  some  years  the  country  was  directed  by  the 
one  great  statesman  whom  Bulgaria  has  produced,  Stephen 
Stambulov,  in  whose  time  Bulgaria  threw  off  the  tutelage 
of  Russia  and  made  herself  truly  independent.  The  young 
nation  constantly  grew  in  strength  and  prestige,  and  in 
1908,  at  the  time  when  Austria  annexed  the  two  Turkish 
provinces,  the  Bulgarian  prince  cast  off  all  Turkish  alle- 
giance and  proclaimed  the  independent  Kingdom  of  Bul- 
garia. 

Four  years  later  Bulgaria  was  the  principal  member  in 
the  Balkan  coalition  which  destroyed  Turkish  power,  and 
after  her  armies  had  everywhere  gained  great  triumphs  she 
found  herself  in,  possession  of  the  province  of  Thrace  down 
beyond  Adrianople.  But  in  the  next  year,  unwilling  to 
compromise  with  her  allies,  she  suddenly  attacked  Servia 
and  Greece.  She  did  not  succeed  in  defeating  them,  and 
while  they  were  driving  her  back  the  Rumanians  suddenly 
came  down  from  the  north,  while  the  Turks  took  back 
Adrianople.     Bulgaria  was  forced  to  make  abject  sub- 


The  King- 
dom of 
Bulgaria, 
1908 


Misfortune 
in  war 


470  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

mission.  It  was  partly  to  get  revenge  and  partly  to  undo 
the  settlement  of  Bucharest  that  the  Bulgarians  joined  the 
Teutonic  powers  in  1915  and  helped  to  destroy  first  Servia 
then  Rumania.  But  in  1918  she  was  the  first  to  surrender 
to  the  Allies,  and  the  war  left  her  poverty-stricken,  ruined 
and  bare. 

The  origin  of  the  Bulgarians  is  not  certainly  known. 
Like  the  Magyars  and  the  Finns  they  are  apparently 
Asiatic  intruders  in  Europe,  but  they  are  much  mixed  with 
Slavic  people,  and  speak  a  Slavic  language.  Their  religion 
is  the  Greek  Catholic,  but  they  have  an  independent 
church,  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate.  The  principal  industry 
is  agriculture,  and  the  Bulgarians  constitute  a  state  of 
small,  sturdy,  free,  independent  peasant  proprietors. 
The  government  is  a  constitutional  monarchy,  under  a 
king  and  a  parliament,  the  Sobranje,  elected  by  the  people. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Austria-Hungary — General:  H.  W.  Steed,  W.  A.  Phillips, 
and  D.  A.  Hannay,  Short  History  of  Austria-Hungary  and  Po- 
land (1914);  H.  W.  Steed,  The  Hapsburg  Monarchy  (2d  ed. 
1914),  best,  by  the  Vienna  correspondent  of  the  London  Times; 
J.  A.  von  Helfert,  Geschichte  Oesterreichs  vom  Ausgange  des 
Wiener  October  Ausstandes  18^y  4  vols.  (1869-86),  the  best 
work  on  the  period. 

The  parts  of  the  Dual  Monarchy:  A.  R.  and  Mrs.  E.  M.  C. 
Colquhon,  The  Whirlpool  of  Europe^  Austria-Hungary  and  the 
Hapsburg s  (1907);  Geoffrey  Drage,  Austria-Hungary  (1909); 
R.  W.  Seton- Watson,  Racial  Problems  in  Hungary  (1908), 
Corruption  and  Reform  in  Hungary  (1911),  The  Southern  Slav 
Question  and  the  Hapsburg  Monarchy  (1911),  excellent;  Josef 
Ulrich,  Das  Oesterreichische  Staatsrecht  (3d  ed.  1904),  best  on  the 
subject;  Alexandre  de  Bertha,  La  Hongrie  Modems,  1849-1901 
(1901),  La  Constitution  Hongroise  (1898).  E.  Denis,  La  Bo- 
heme  depuis  la  Montagne- Blanche  2  vols.  (1903). 

Austria-Hungary  and  the  Balkans:  A.  Beer,  Die  Orientalische 
Politik  Oesterreichs  seit  1771}.  (1883);  T.  von  Sosnosky,  Die  Balr 
kanpolitik  Osterreich-Ungams  seit  1866,  2  vols.  (1913). 


4k 


AUSTRIA,  TURKEY,  BALKANS    471 

The  Ottoman  Empire:  W.  Miller,  The  Ottoman  Em'pire,  1801- 
1913  (1913),  for  a  good  introductory  account;  W.  E.  D.  Allen, 
The  Turks  in  Europe  (1919) ;  V.  Berard,  Le  Sultan,  V Islam,  et  les 
Puissances  (1907) ;  W.  E.  Curtis,  The  Turk  and  His  Lost  Prov- 
inces (1903);  A.  Vicomte  de  la  Jonquiere,  Histoire  de  VEmpire 
Ottoman,  2  vols.  (3d  ed.  1914),  the  second  volume  contains  the 
fullest  account  of  Turkey  since  1870;  "Odysseus"  [Sir  C.  N.  E. 
Eliot],  Turkey  in  Europe  (1908),  excellent  and  suggestive;  R. 
Pinon,  U Europe  et  VEmpire  Ottoman  (1913). 

The  Eastern  Question:  Edouard  Driault,  La  Question  d' Ori- 
ent depuis  Ses  Origines  jusqu  a  Nos  Jours  (1898,  7th  ed.  1917), 
best;  Die  Balkanfrage,  ed.  by  M.  J.  Bonn,  (1914);  M.  Choublier, 
La  Question  d'Orient  depuis  le  TraitS  de  Berlin  (1897) ;  S.  P.  H. 
Duggan,  The  Eastern  Question — a  Study  in  Diplomacy  (1902); 
J.  A.  R.  Marriott,  The  Eastern  Question  (1917).  ^  ^  f 

The  Balkan  Wars:  H.  M.  Bralisford,  Macedonia:  Its  Races 
and  Their  Future  (1906) ;  Andre  Cheradame,  Douze  Ans  de  Propa-  i ' 

gande,  1900-1912  (1913);  L.  E.  Gueschoff,  U Alliance  Balkan- 
ique  (1915),  English  trans.  (1915),  contains  important  documents 
and  first-hand  information;  G.  Young,  Nationalism  and  War  in 
the  Near  East  (1915).  For  the  military  operations:  J.  G.  Schur- 
man,  The  Balkan  Wars,  1912-1913  (1914);  RepoH  of  the  Inter- 
national Commission  to  Inquire  into  the  Causes  and  Conduxit  of 
the  Balkan  Wars  (Carnegie  Endowment  for  International 
Peace,  1914) ;  Ellis  Ashmead-Bartlett,  With  the  Turks  in  Thrace 
(1913) ;  Hermengild  Wagner,  With  the  Victorious  Bulgars  (1913). 

Greece:  Sir  R.  C.  Jebb,  Modern  Greece  (2d  ed.  1901);  Lewis 
Sergeant,  Greece  in  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1897);  George  Fin- 
lay,  History  of  the  Greek  Revolution  (1877),  best  on  the  subject; 
P.  F.  Martin,  Greece  of  the  Twentieth  Century  (1913).  C.  Kero- 
filas,  Eleutherios  Venizelos  (trans,  by  B.  Barstow,  1915). 

The  Balkan  states :  W.  S.  Murray,  The  Making  of  the  Balkan 
States  (Columbia  University  Studies,  XXXIX,  no.  1,  1910), 
scholarly;  William  Miller,  The  Balkans:  Roumania,  Bulgaria, 
Servia,  and  Montenegro  (2d  ed.  1908). 

Montenegro:  F.  S.  Stevenson,  A  History  of  Montenegro 
(1912). 

Servia:  H.  W.  V.  Temperley,  History  of  Serbia  (1917),  best 
in  English;  Prince  and  Princess  Lazarovich-Hrebelianovich, 
The  Servian  People,  Their  Past  Glory  and  Their  Destiny,  2  vols. 
(1910);  W.  M.  Petrovitch,  Serbia,  Her  People,  History,  and  As- 
pirations (1915). 


472  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

Rumania:  Oscar  Brilliant,  Roumania  (1915);  Nicolae  Jorga, 
Geschichte  des  Rumdnischen  VolkeSy  2  vols.  (1905),  best;  D. 
Mitrany,  Roumania^  Her  History  and  Politics  (1915). 

Bulgaria:  Edward  Dicey,  The  Peasant  State:  an  Account  of 
Bulgaria  in  1894  (1894);  Guerin  Songeon,  Histoire  de  la  Bjd- 
garie  deyuis  les  Origines  jusqu'ci  Nos  Jours  (1913). 


CHAPTER    VIII 

COLONIES    AND    IMPERIAL 
EXPANSION 

God  of  ouF  fathers,  known  of  old, 

Lord  of  our  far-flung  battle-line. 
Beneath  whose  awful  Hand  we  hold 

Dominion  over  palm  and  pine — 
Lord  God  of  Hosts,  be  with  us  yet. 

Lest  we  forget — lest  we  forget! 

RuDYARD  Kipling,  "Recessional"  (1897). 

If  Germany  becomes  a  Colonizing  Power,  all  I  can  say  is  "God  speed 
her."  She  becomes  our  ally  and  partner  in  the  execution  of  a  great 
purpose  of  Providence  for  the  benefit  of  mankind.     .     .     . 

Gladstone  in  the  House  of  Commons,  March  12,  1885. 

The  latter  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  was  strikingly  The  expan- 
marked  by  a  great  movement  which  had  been  going  on  for  ^*°°  °^ 
some  hundreds  of  years,  the  expansion  of  European  people 
and  power  into  other  parts  of  the  world.  The  process  was 
more  rapid  than  ever  before,  because  some  of  the  European 
states  were  now  stronger  and  more  capable  of  great  under- 
takings, and  because  of  improved  means  of  communica- 
tion: the  telegraph,  the  steamship,  the  railroad.  The 
principal  motives  continued,  as  in  earlier  times,  to  be  desire 
for  raw  materials  and  wealth,  the  hope  which  individuals 
had  of  finding  their  fortune,  and  the  belief  that  colonies 
made  the  mother  country  stronger  and  greater.  As  the 
Virginia  Company  of  London  and  the  Dutch  East  India 
Company  had  carried  colonists  and  power  to  America 
or  Asia  in  the  seventeenth  century,  so  in  the  nineteenth 
did  the  Association  of  the  Congo  and  the  British  South 

473 


Europe 


474 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Europe 

unimportant 

once 


European 
peoples  now 
dominate 
the   world 


Africa  Company  acquire  great  African  dominions.  As 
in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  England  and 
France  sought  colonial  possessions  for  raw  materials  and 
naval  stores,  so  in  the  nineteenth  and  twentieth  did  the 
German  Empire  try  to  get  colonies  containing  cotton  and 
rubber.  And  as  Great  Britain  in  the  time  of  George  II 
and  George  III  wished  America  to  buy  British  manufac- 
tures and  supply  business  for  the  British  ships,  so  did 
France  and  Germany  now  hope  that  they  might  build  up 
colonial  empires  to  assure  them  of  a  market  for  their  goods. 

Nothing  is  more  wonderful  than  this  expansion  of  Euro- 
pean people  and  power  into  America,  Asia,  and  Africa. 
In  early  times  the  north  shore  of  Africa,  with  Egypt  and 
Carthage,  was  more  important  than  southern  Europe  with 
Greece  and  Rome.  From  faraway  times  Asia  rightly 
seemed  the  center  of  the  world  and  the  cradle  of  civilization, 
with  the  culture  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  the  teeming 
myriads  of  old  India,  and  farther  remote  the  vast  numbers 
and  immobile  character  of  immemorial  China.  To  the 
wealthy  and  cultured  upper  classes  of  Hindustan  and 
Persia,  Europe  must  have  seemed  small  and  sparsely 
peopled  and  unimportant.  During  all  this  time  and 
long  after,  the  great  American  continents  lay  hidden  be- 
yond their  ocean,  almost  unpeopled,  and  to  the  rest  of  the 
world  unsuspected  and  unknown,  unless  sometimes  faintly 
imagined  as  Atlantis  or  Ultima  Thule. 

During  the  past  four  hundred  years  a  vast  change  has 
come  over  the  world.  Asia,  which  as  late  as  the  twelfth 
century  threatened  to  overrun  Europe,  long  ago  lost  her 
superiority,  and  Europe  going  forward  with  immense  accel- 
eration, has  gained  unquestioned  primacy  in  culture  and 
power.  First  she  discovered  and  appropriated  the  Amer- 
icas, then  she  took  parts  of  Asia,  then  most  of  Africa  also. 
By  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century  European 
people  and  their  rule  had  expanded  into  all  the  four  quar- 
ters of  the  world,  and  the  continents  were  largely  occupied 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      475 

by  them  or  contained  in  the  colonial  empires  of  European 
powers. 

The  greatest,  though  not  the  oldest  of  tliese  colonial 
empires  was  the  British,  which  at  the  end  of  the  nineteenth 
century  contained  13,000,000  square  miles  of  territory  and 
425,000,000  people.  As  early  as  1583  England  established 
a  claim  to  Newfoundland  the  center  of  the  wondrous  new 
American  fisheries.  In  the  early  years  of  the  seventeenth 
century  she  took  possession  of  some  of  the  smaller  islands 
of  the  West  Indies  and  presently,  in  1655,  the  more  im- 
portant island  of  Jamaica.  During  this  same  period  she 
began  the  establishment  of  her  colonies  on  the  mainland, 
and  in  the  years  from  1607,  when  Virginia  was  founded, 
to  1733,  when  Georgia  was  established,  she  got  possession  of 
the  best  part  of  the  Atlantic  coast  of  North  America. 
Meanwhile  in  1638  she  took  Honduras  in  Central  America. 
In  the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth  century  also  she  ob- 
tained a  footing  in  Africa  at  Gambia  and  the  G^ld  Coast, 
and  in  1651  the  little  island  off  the  west  African  coast, 
St.  Helena,  afterward  so  much  renowned.  Meanwhile 
in  Hindustan  the  English  East  India  Company  was  estab- 
lishing forts  and  factories  which  were  the  forerunners  of 
an  Indian  empire. 

Down  to  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  English 
colonies  came  largely  from  settlement  or  exploration,  and 
they  lay  for  the  most  part  in  North  America.  Britain  now 
greatly  extended  her  holdings  as  the  result  of  successful 
wars,  mostly  at  the  expense  of  France.  In  1704,  during 
the  War  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  she  seized  Gibraltar, 
one  of  the  gates  of  the  Mediterranean,  which  ever  since  she 
has  kept;  while  in  1713  by  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht,  which 
brought  the  struggle  to  an  end,  she  got  from  France  New 
Brunswick  and  Nova  Scotia,  the  outposts  of  Canada,  and 
undisputed  title  to  the  territory  of  Hudson  Bay.  In  1763, 
by  the  Peace  of  Paris,  which  ended  the  Seven  Years'  War 
between  England  and  France,  she  got  from  France  the  re- 


476  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

mainder  of  Canada,  what  is  now  Prince  Edward  Island, 
Ontario,  and  Quebec,  as  well  as  important  islands  in  the 
West  Indies,  and  at  the  same  time  the  supremacy  of  the 
British  in  India  was  confirmed.  A  little  later  she  got  the 
Falkland  Islands  not  far  east  of  the  southern  extremity  of 
South  America.  Now,  however,  came  the  great  disaster 
in  the  history  of  the  British  Empire:  in  1775  the  Thirteen 
Colonies  on  the  mainland  of  North  America  rebelled,  and 
by  1783  they  had  won  the  acknowledgment  of  their  in- 
dependence. 
Further  Increase  of  the  British  colonial  empire  soon  proceeded 

expansion  again.  In  1786  a  beginning  was  made  of  obtaining  the 
Straits  Settlements,  situated  by  the  great  trade  routes 
which  run  past  southeast  Asia,  near  to  the  world's  greatest 
supply  of  tin.  In  1788  in  New  South  Wales  began  the 
occupation  of  Australia.  During  the  wars  of  the  French 
Revolution  and  with  Napoleon  British  control  of  the  sea 
was  at  no  time  shaken,  and  in  consequence  new  acquisitions 
were  made,  at  the  expense  of  France,  or  of  Holland  under 
French  control.  Thus  it  was  that  Ceylon,  south  of  India, 
was  taken  in  1795,  Trinidad  off  the  north  coast  of  South 
America  two  years  later,  and  Cape  Colony  in  1806.  They 
were  all  taken  from  the  Dutch,  and  Britain  kept  them  when 
the  affairs  of  Europe  were  settled  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna, 
Holland  getting  Belgium  as  compensation.  In  addition 
she  got  other  West  India  Islands  from  France,  Malta  one 
of  the  principal  keys  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  Heligoland, 
^  once  owned  by  Denmark.  Meanwhile  the  servants  of  the 
East  India  Company  were  extending  the  Company's  sway 
over  a  vast  territory  and  population  in  India,  and  in  1858, 
after  the  suppression  of  the  Indian  Mutiny,  the  Company's 
powers  were  transferred  to  the  British  Crown.  During 
the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  also  Great  Britain 
extended  her  possessions  in  Canada  to  the  Pacific,  and,  ex- 
cept for  Alaska,  got  possession  of  all  North  America  from 
the  United  States  to  the  Arctic.     In  1878,  at  the  Congress 


COLONIES' AND  EXPANSION      477 


of  Berlin,  in  return  for  support  against  Russia,  Turkey 
ceded  to  Great  Britain  the  island  of  Cyprus  at  the  eastern 
end  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea. 

In  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  England  got 
complete  control  of  the  eastern  end  of  the  Mediterranean 
Sea.  A  Frenchman,  Ferdinand  de  Lesseps,  organized  a 
company  partly  French  and  partly  shared  in  by  the  Egyp- 
tian government,  to  cut  a  ship  canal  through  the  isthmus 
which  joins  Africa  and  Asia.  He  afterward  failed  in  a 
still  greater  undertaking  at  Panama,  but  in  1869  the  Suez 
Canal  was  opened  to  traffic,  and  the  route  to  the  Far  East, 
formerly  around  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  wa^  shortened  by 
six  thousand  miles.  Before  the  discovery  of  America  the 
Mediterranean  Sea  had  immense  importance,  but  after  the 
time  of  Columbus  and  Da  Gama,  changed  conditions  made 
its  consequence  less.  Now  the  opening  of  the  canal  in 
Egypt  made  the  Mediterranean  the  short  water  route 
between  Europe  and  Asia,  and  the  greatest  sea  way  in  the 
world.  This  route  soon  passed  under  British  control. 
In  1875,  the  Khedive,  the  ruler  of  Egypt,  a  spendthrift  at 
the  end  of  his  resources,  sold  to  the  British  government 
Egypt's  shares  for  even  £5,000,000,  and  Britain,  owning 
nearly  half  of  the  stock,  became  the  principal  shareholder 
in  the  Company. 

The  condition  of  Egyptian  finances  soon  became  so  in- 
volved that  the  European  powers  intervened,  and  a  Dual 
Control  of  the  country  was  established  by  Great  Britain 
and  France.  In  1881  a  nationalist  movement  under  Arabi 
Pasha  threatened  the  foreigners,  and,  France  declining  to 
participate,  England  suppressed  the  uprising  and  took 
possession  of  the  country.  France  protested  at  this,  but 
the  British  government  declared  that  it  was  not  establish- 
ing a  protectorate,  and  would  withdraw  as  soon  as  condi- 
tions allowed.  Egypt  under  British  guidance  and  control 
settled  down  to  prosperity  and  order  and  the  masses  of 
the  people  were  better  off  than  they  had  been  for  ages. 


Egypt 


Egypt 

becomes   a 
British 
protectorate 


478 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 
Sudan 


Other 

African 

possessions 


South 
Africa 


But  as  the  years  went  on  British  occupation  continued. 
At  length,  in  1904,  when  Britain  and  France  entered  into 
the  Entente  Cordiale,  France  withdrew  her  opposition; 
and  in  1914,  early  in  the  Great  War,  Egypt  was  made  a 
protectorate  of  the  British  Empire.  Under  British  con- 
trol Egypt's  domain  was  greatly  extended.  To  the  south 
lay  the  Sudan.  Formerly  it  had  been  under  Egyptian 
rule,  but  in  1881  under  the  Mahdi  it  became  independent. 
Seventeen  years  later  an  English  and  Egyptian  army  under 
General  Kitchener  overthrew  the  Sudanese  in  the  battle 
of  Omdurman,  and  all  the  country  was  taken  again. 

In  1884  a  Conference  was  held  in  Berlin  upon  African 
affairs,  and  in  1890  agreements  were  made  between  Ger- 
many and  Great  Britain  and  France  and  Great  Britain, 
by  which  rival  claims  were  adjusted.  British  possessions 
were  now  extended  south  from  the  Sudan  through  Uganda 
to  British  East  Africa  which  had  been  already  obtained. 
In  exchange  for  Heligoland,  which  she  ceded  to  the  German 
Empire,  Britain  got  the  island  of  Zanzibar  just  off  the 
east  African  coast.  Thus  a  splendid  African  empire  had 
been  built  up  from  the  mouths  of  the  Nile  to  the  Indian 
Ocean. 

To  the  south  an  empire  equally  magnificent  had  been 
constructed  in  the  meantime.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
century  Cape  Colony  had  been  taken  from  the  Dutch. 
Then  the  Boers,  or  Dutch  farmers,  went  away  to  the  in- 
terior and  founded  independent  communities,  the  Orange 
Free  State,  Natal,  and  the  Transvaal.  In  1843  Natal 
was  annexed  by  the  British,  and  the  Orange  Free  State  and 
the  Transvaal  were  taken  for  a  while,  but  soon  given  in- 
dependence again.  In  course  of  time  British  dominion 
was  extended  far  to  the  north  of  these  small  states.  In 
1889  the  British  South  Africa  Company  was  chartered, 
and  under  the  leadership  of  Cecil  Rhodes  acquired  the  vast 
country  afterward  known  as  Rhodesia.  So  British  terri- 
tory in  Africa  extended  down  from  the  Mediterranean  to 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      479 


German  East  Africa  and  up  from  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope 
to  this  same  German  possession.  In  1899  the  trouble 
which  had  long  been  growing  between  the  British  in  South 
Africa  and  the  Boer  republics  developed  into  a  war,  in 
which  the  small  Dutch  communities  of  hardy  farmers,  ex- 
pert with  rifle,  well  provided  with  artillery  made  in  France, 
and  taking  advantage  of  the  great  distances  of  the  country, 
proved  themselves  no  poor  match  for  Great  Britain,  ob- 
liged to  carry  on  a  difficult  contest  far  from  her  base  of 
operations.  After  skilful  and  heroic  resistance,  however, 
the  Boers  were  completely  conquered,  and  the  two  states 
annexed  by  Great  Britain.  As  a  result  of  all  this  one  third 
of  the  continent  had  come  into  British  hands. 

During  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  the 
British  continued  to  enlarge  their  dominions  in  Asia.  It 
was  they  who  in  the  "Opium  War"  in  1842  forced  the 
Chinese  government  to  open  five  "treaty"  ports  to  foreign 
trade,  and  also  to  cede  to  the  British  the  small  island  of 
Hong  Kong  off  the  south  China  coast  which  later  became  a 
huge  emporium  of  trade  with  China.  The  "Opium  War" 
itself  was  an  exceedingly  ugly  affair,  for  irrespective  of 
its  larger  results  it  was  intervention  by  the  British  because 
of  efforts  of  the  Chinese  government  to  suppress  the  opium 
traffic,  and  save  its  people  from  ruin  of  body  and  soul. 
For  many  years  the  Chinese  government  was  unable  to 
prevent  the  importation  and  use  of  opium ;  and  while  the 
despair  and  indignation  of  the  enlightened  people  of  China 
were  ill-understood,  yet  after  a  while  people  in  the  western 
hemisphere  came  to  realize  the  enormity  and  horror  of  the 
thing.  Finally  the  British  authorities  themselves  inter- 
vened to  help  to  bring  it  to  an  end.  From  the  opening  of 
the  Chinese  ports  an  enormous  and  wealthy  trade  devel- 
oped, of  which  the  great  world  powers  obtained  an  increas- 
ing share.  Toward  the  end  of  the  century  some  of  the 
European  powers  began  seizing  upon  "spheres  of  influ- 
ence."    In  1898,  at  a  time  when  it  seemed  that  Russia  was 


The   Boer 

War, 

1899-1902 


The 

"Opium 

War" 


to  India 


480  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

Wei-hti-  about  to  get  the  greatest  part  of  the  spoils  of  the  country, 

wel  the  British  demanded  and  obtained  the  port  of  Wei-hai- 

wei,  not  far  from  Korea  and  Port  Arthur,  and  far  to  the 
north  of  the  old  settlement  at  Hong  Kong. 
The  India  had  from  the  first  been  the  most  important  British 

approaches  possession  in  Asia.  After  the  defeat  of  the  French  in  the 
eighteenth  century  it  had  for  a  long  while  seemed  far  from 
possible  enemies  and  safe  from  attack;  but  in  the  nine- 
teenth century  the  constant  expansion  of  Russia  brought 
nearer  the  Muscovite  power,  until  vigilance  against  Russia 
and  the  getting  of  a  strong  Indian  frontier  were  of  large 
moment  in  the  foreign  policy  of  Great  Britain.  With 
Afghanistan,  to  the  northwest  and  leading  to  some  of  the 
great  approaches  down  into  India,  two  wars  were  fought, 
in  1838  and  in  1878,  as  a  result  of  which  the  country  became 
in  its  foreign  relations  practically  a  protectorate  of  the 
British  Empire,  and  a  buffer  state  between  India  and 
Russia.  In  1854  Baluchistan  was  made  partly  dependent, 
and  later  on  a  portion  of  it  was  made  completely  so,  and 
the  rest  of  it  annexed.  To  the  west  of  these  two  little- 
known  countries  lay  the  ancient  state  of  Persia.  By  the 
end  of  the  nineteenth  century  Russian  expansion  threat- 
ened to  absorb  it,  and  at  last  bring  the  Russian  Empire 
out  to  the  warm  waters  of  the  south,  on  the  Persian  Gulf 
and  the  Arabian  Sea,  over  across  from  India.  To  counter- 
act this,  while  the  Russians  were  getting  control  of  north- 
em  Persia  the  British  tried  to  dominate  the  south,  and  a 
long  contest  was  ended  when  Great  Britain  and  Russia 
made  their  agreement  of  1907  by  which  northern  Persia 
became  Russia's  sphere  of  influence  and  the  southern  part 
a  British  sphere,  with  a  neutral  zone  in  between.  To  the 
east  of  India  also  British  power  was  extended.  In  1885 
Burma,  on  the  other  side  of  the  Bay  of  Bengal,  was 
annexed.  To  the  northeast  the  mountain  states  of 
Nepal  and  Bhutan  were  made  dependent,  and  then  after 
9,  while  the  British  crossed  through  the  vast  mountains 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      481 


which  separate  India  from  the  Empire  of  China,  and  by 
1914  had  made  of  Thibet  practically  an  outlying  de- 
pendent state. 

By  this  time  Britain  had  beyond  dispute  the  greatest 
colonial  empire  in  the  world.  With  the  aggregate  of  her 
domain  there  was  nothing  to  compare  except  the  posses- 
sions of  the  United  States,  the  vaster  but  less  valuable 
territory  of  Russia,  and  the  immense  expanses  of  China. 
The  empire  had  been  built  up  easily  because  England's 
geographical  position  gave  her  advantages  over  the  great- 
est of  her  rivals,  and  her  control  of  the  sea  enabled  her  to 
add  to  it  in  peace  and  as  the  result  of  every  great  war  in 
which  she  fought.  The  area  of  the  British  Isles  was  only 
120,000  square  miles,  that  of  England  less  than  half  as 
much,  and  the  population  of  the  United  Kingdom  only 
about  forty -five  million  souls.  But  England,  which  at  the 
beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  was  one  of  the  less  im- 
portant countries  in  Europe  was  now  the  greatest,  and  the 
empire  of  which  she  was  the  center  embraced  a  fourth  of 
the  land  surface  of  the  earth.  From  this  vast  area  came  a 
large  part  of  the  world's  tin,  half  of  its  gold,  a  third  of 
its  coal,  a  third  of  its  wool,  a  fifth  of  its  wheat,  and 
other  products  without  number.  Its  great  weakness  was 
that  it  was  widely  scattered,  with  the  seas  of  the  world 
separating  its  principal  parts,  and  great  land  powers  grow- 
ing ever  more  powerful  near  them.  It  was  held  together 
by  the  thing  which  had  built  it  up:  the  most  powerful  navy 
in  the  world.  If  ever  the  British  navy  were  beaten  or 
dispersed,  then  the  empire  would  lie  before  the  enemy  like 
spoil  to  be  taken  at  will. 

The  British  Empire  was,  in  some  respects,  a  strange  and 
conglomerate  affair.  Not  only  were  its  parts  widely  sep- 
arate and  distant,  but  it  embraced  peoples  of  every  race 
and  religion,  in  all  stages  of  culture  and  political  progress. 
Its  elements  were  far  more  diverse  than  those  which  com- 
posed Russia  or  Austria-Hungary.     Outside  of  the  British 


Extent  and 
character  of 
the  British 
Empire 


Peoples    of 
the  Empire 


482 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


British  rule 


Self- 
government 
'ji    parts    of 
the  Empire 


Isles  there  were  in  this  empire  some  twelve  million  of  Eng- 
lish people,  and  about  three  million  more  of  the  white  race. 
These  people  were  mostly  in  Canada,  Australia,  New 
Zealand,  and  South  Africa.  Of  the  remaining  365,000,000 
all  but  50,000,000  were  in  the  vast  aggregation  of  races  in 
the  Indian  domain,  while  in  Africa  there  were  40,000,000 
negroes,  and  in  the  other  lands  some  millions  of  Malays, 
Chinese,  and  others.  A  great  part  of  all  the  Moham- 
medans of  the  world  were  under  British  rule,  as  were 
Brahmans,  Buddhists  and  many  others.  In  holding 
together  these  peoples  the  British  showed  themselves 
the  ablest  colonial  administrators  the  world  ever  had 
seen. 

In  the  Empire  the  people  of  England  and  Scotland  had 
obtained  great  wealth,  and  had  made  investments  which 
rendered  much  of  the  world  tributary  to  London;  while 
the  British  mercantile  marine,  largely  supported  by  trade 
between  the  parts,  was  the  largest  ever  seen  in  the  world. 
Some  of  the  peoples  in  the  Empire,  in  India  and  Egypt, 
were  held  unwillingly  and  longed  to  obtain  independence. 
None  the  less,  considering  all  the  difficulties  involved,  there 
had  never  been  a  great  empire  ruled  so  justly  and  well,  and 
wherever  British  rule  had  come,  in  India,  or  the  islands 
of  the  sea,  better  conditions  had  resulted  for  most  of  the 
people. 

To  all  the  white  peoples  outside  of  the  United  Kingdom 
self-government  had  been  granted :  in  Newfoundland,  Can- 
ada, Australia,  New  Zealand,  and  the  Union  of  South 
Africa.  These  self-governing  dominions  had  such  com- 
plete control  of  their  own  affairs  that  they  were  indepen- 
dent in  all  except  name,  ruling  themselves  through  their 
own  elected  representatives.  So  loose  was  the  connection, 
indeed,  that  a  statesman  declared  that  in  August,  1914,  the 
British  Empire  had  come  to  an  end.  But  at  this  very 
time  it  was  abundantly  shown  that  the  bonds  were  never 
stronger,  and  that  while  the  dominions  were  no  longer 


t 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      483 

attached  by  any  compulsion,  they  were  strongly  bound 
by  ties  of  love  and  devotion. 

To  the  remaining  365,000,000  people  of  the  empire  selL 
government  had  not  been  given;  but  it  could  scarcely  oF 
doubted  that  the  condition  of  the  masses  of  India,  bad  as 
it  was,  had  never  before  been  so  good,  and  that  the  fella- 
keen  were  attaining  some  prosperity  and  economic  well- 
being  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  Egypt.  And  there 
could  be  no  doubt  that  most  of  the  non-white  population 
of  the  Empire  would  not,if  left  to  themselves,  have  evolved 
any  representative,  self-government,  and  were  not  yet 
fitted  to  make  it  work.  The  comparative  liberality  of 
British  rule  made  it  the  more  possible  for  some  of  the  edu- 
cated minority  and  the  upper  classes  among  these  jjeople 
to  long  for  independence,  and  it  was  most  proper  that 
they  should  desire  to  have  it.  None  the  less,  it  is  probable 
that  in  1914  the  greatest  good  of  most  of  the  people  in  the 
empire  demanded  the  continuance  of  British  rule,  and 
that  the  British  Empire  was  one  of  the  most  useful  and 
beneficent  organizations  in  the  world. 

Next  in  greatness  was  the  colonial  empire  of  France, 
her  second  empire,  the  work  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
After  the  Seven  Years'  War  and  the  contests  of  the  Revolu- 
tion, and  Napoleon's  time,  France's  colonial  domain  had 
been  reduced  to  a  few  trading  posts  in  India,  French 
Guiana  on  the  north  coast  of  South  America,  and  a  few 
islands,  of  which  the  most  important  were  Martinique  and 
Guadeloupe  in  the  West  Indies.  In  1830  an  expedition 
was  despatched  which  captured  Algiers  and  after  a  long 
and  troublesome  war  Algeria  was  completely  conquered 
(1857).  In  the  period  of  the  Second  Empire  an  ambitious 
colonial  policy  was  carried  forward,  some  islands  in  the 
Pacific  acquired,  and,  after  a  war  with  China,  commercial 
concessions.  In  1862  the  French  obtained  part  of  Cochin 
China,  and  the  rest  of  it  five  years  later.  In  1863  they 
established  a  protectorate  over  Cambodia.     In  1867  a  be- 


Subject 
peoples 


The   French 

colonial 

empire 


in  Africa 


484  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

ginning  was  made  of  the  acquisition  of  French  Somaliland 
in  East  Africa,  commanding  one  side  of  the  outlet  of  the 
Red  Sea.  Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  Napoleon  failed 
to  make  a  dependency  of  Mexico,  France  was  by  the  end 
of  his  reign  getting  to  be  the  second  colonial  power  in  the 
world.  After  the  Franco-Prussian  War  France  sought 
compensation  abroad,  and  Bismarck  encouraged  French 
statesmen  to  do  this,  glad  to  divert  their  attention.  In 
1885  after  a  war  with  China,  a  protectorate  was  established 
over  Tonkin  and  Annam,  states  in  Southeastern  Asia  upon 
which  the  Chinese  had  long  had  some  shadowy  claim. 
All  these  acquisitions  from  Cambodia  to  the  border  of 
China  became  French  Cochin-China,  the  chief  Asiatic 
possession  of  France. 
J^®  French  The  greatest  expansion  was  in  northern  Africa,  where 
the  French  extended  their  power  out  from  Algeria  and 
through  the  Sahara,  until  all  the  north  part  of  the  conti- 
nent to  the  borders  of  Egypt  and  Tripoli  was  included. 
In  1881  Tunis,  to  the  east  of  Algeria,  was  occupied  and 
became  a  protectorate.  In  1892  Dahomey,  on  the  south- 
em  shore  of  the  great  north  African  bulge  was  conquered, 
and  from  there,  and  from  the  mouth  of  the  Senegal  River, 
which  they  had  long  held,  expeditions  were  dispatched  to 
the  north.  About  the  same  time,  farther  south,  French 
traders  pushed  inland  and  acquired  the  French  Congo. 
From  all  these  points,  north  and  south,  explorers,  as 
enterprising  and  bold  as  Champlain  and  La  Salle  once  had 
been,  explored  the  country  and  took  it  for  France,  until 
nearly  all  of  the  Sahara  and  its  oases  and  trade  routes  were 
acquired.  In  1895  France  established  a  protectorate  over 
the  island  of  Madagascar,  off  the  southeast  coast,  once  the 
haunt  of  pirates,  a  vast  extent  to  which  the  French  had  laid 
claim  since  before  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
In  1911  she  established  a  protectorate  over  Morocco. 

As  a  result  of  this  expansion  in  Africa  and  Asia  France 
had  a  magnificent  colonial  empire.     Her  possessions  were 


^ 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      485 


far  less  in  area,  population  and  resources  than  those  of 
the  British  Empire,  yet  some  of  them,  like  Morocco  and 
Algeria,  lay  in  a  position  of  great  importance,  they  were  a 
store-house  of  raw  materials,  and  furnished  the  products 
for  a  lucrative  trade.  Algeria  had  been  annexed  directly 
to  France,  and  sent  representatives  to  the  legislature  in 
Paris,  though  only  a  small  portion  of  the  population  might 
vote,  and  the  people  had  little  control  over  the  officials 
who  ruled  them.  In  Algeria  to  a  considerable  extent, 
and  in  the  other  colonies  entirely,  the  French  were  an 
upper  and  ruling  class.  To  none  of  the  French  colonies 
had  complete  self-government  been  extended,  largely,  no 
doubt,  because  to  none  of  them  had  many  Frenchmen  ever 
gone  to  live.  The  French  had  shown  magnificent  ability 
and  skill  in  acquiring  possessions,  but  they  were  not  col- 
onizers as  the  British  were,  for  most  Frenchmen  were  un- 
willing to  live  outside  of  France,  and  no  high  birth-rate 
produced  a  surplus  population  to  send  abroad.  As  in  the 
British  Empire  so  in  the  French,  capitalists  had  large 
concessions  and  had  made  great  investments  from  which 
large  revenues  came.  Yet  for  the  most  part  the  advent 
of  France  into  these  distant  places  had  brought  better 
conditions  for  the  people. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  German 
Empire  also  acquired  colonial  possessions,  but  they  were 
far  inferior  in  size  and  in  value  to  those  of  Great  Britain 
or  France.  At  a  time  when  Great  Britain  had  got  vast 
possessions,  and  when  France  was  gathering  a  new  empire, 
the  Germans  were  just  achieving  their  national  unity,  and 
even  after  1871  it  seemed  for  some  time  to  Bismarck  and 
his  contemporaries  that  colonies  were  of  little  importance. 
But  to  a  younger  generation  they  seemed  indispensable, 
and  about  1879  businessmen  and  merchants  made  the 
beginning  of  colonial  development.  In  that  year  conces- 
sions were  obtained  in  the  Samoan  Islands.  In  the  next 
few  years  other  trading  posts  were  established  in  islands  of 


Extent  and 
character   of 
this  empire 


The 

German 

colonies 


486 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  English 
and  the 
Germans    in 
Africa 


The 

Germans 
Asia  and 
South 
America 


the  Pacific  and  also  in  various  places  in  Africa.  In  1883 
a  German  merchant,  LUderitz,  laid  the  foundations  of 
German  Southwest  Africa.  A  year  later  Togoland  and 
Kamerun  on  the  Gulf  of  Guinea  were  obtained  by  a  Ger- 
man traveler.  In  the  same  year  three  other  adventurous 
Germans  acquired  what  was  made  into  the  most  important 
of  all  Germany's  colonial  possessions,  German  East  Africa, 
on  the  Indian  Ocean.  All  these  African  holdings  were  got 
in  the  first  place  by  travellers  or  merchants  making  treaties 
with  native  rulers.  By  this  time  the  interest  of  Bismarck 
had  been  enlisted  and  the  German  government  established 
protectorates  in  the  new  acquisitions. 

Considerable  efforts  were  made  to  extend  German  pos- 
sessions, mostly  without  any  success.  British  and  German 
schemes  soon  came  into  conflict.  It  was  the  ambition  of 
some  Englishmen  to  get  a  broad  strip  of  territory  from  the 
Cape  of  Good  Hope  to  Cairo,  and  some  Germans  hoped 
that  their  country  might  acquire  a  stretch  of  territory 
straight  across  the  southern  portion  of  the  continent  from 
German  Southwest  Africa  on  the  Atlantic  to  German  East 
Africa  on  the  Indian  Ocean.  In  1919,  as  a  result  of  the 
Great  War  the  British  ambition  was  realized,  but  pre- 
viously a  compromise  had  been  made.  In  1890  an  Anglo- 
German  agreement  was  made  which  so  established  German 
East  Africa  that  the  British  were  unable  to  connect  the 
northern  and  southern  parts  of  their  empire,  and  German 
Southwest  Africa  and  Kamerun  were  enlarged. 

In  Asia  the  Germans  had  one  temporary  success.  In 
1897,  to  avenge  as  they  said,  the  murder  of  two  mission- 
aries, the  German  authorities  seized  Kiao-chau  Bay  in  the 
Chinese  province  of  Shantung,  and  compelled  the  Chinese 
government  to  yield  them  a  ninety-nine  year  lease  of  the 
place.  Then  they  proceeded  to  fortify  it  and  make  of  it  a 
great  naval  base,  which  might  later  be  the  foundation  of  a 
German  protectorate  in  China.  In  South  America,  es- 
pecially in  Southern  Brazil,  where  many  German  emi- 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      487 


grants  had  settled,  it  was  believed  that  the  German 
Empire  hoped  to  get  possessions,  but  the  Monroe  Doctrine 
of  the  United  States  stood  in  the  way.  The  best  oppor- 
tunity that  remained  seemed  to  be  in  Asia  Minor  and 
Mesopotamia,  but  here  Germany  encountered  the  opposi- 
tion of  Great  Britain,  until  an  agreement  was  made  in  1914 
just  before  the  War  broke  out. 

Altogether  the  efforts  of  the  Germans  to  found  a  colonial 
empire  had  met  with  scanty  success.  It  might  have  been 
that  in  the  future  the  best  of  her  colonies  could  have  been 
successfully  developed,  but  meanwhile  the  Germans  showed 
less  skill  than  the  British  or  the  French.  In  attempting  to 
impose  their  system  and  their  organization  upon  the 
natives  of  their  colonies  they  sometimes  acted  with  great 
harshness  and  brutality,  provoking  the  natives  to  rise  and 
then  carrying  on  wars  of  extermination  against  them. 
This  conduct  brought  them  an  evil  renown ;  but  it  is  neces- 
sary to  remember  that  the  terrible  climate  of  central  Africa 
and  the  distance  from  the  customs  and  civilization  of  white 
men,  led  other  colonizers  besides  the  Germans  to  do  deeds 
which  might  well  bring  the  blush  of  shame.  Altogether, 
the  German  colonies  afforded  hope  ior  the  future  rather 
than  a  present  benefit,  and  entailed  expense  to  German 
taxpayers  greater  than  the  revenue  yielded  by  them. 

Italy,  like  Germany,  entered  the  quest  for  colonies  almost 
too  late.  Like  the  Germans  the  Italian  people  were  long 
occupied  in  the  mere  effort  to  achieve  national  unity  and 
make  strong  their  position  at  home.  When  they  turned 
to  colonial  expansion  their  first  desire  was  to  take  Tunis, 
which  lay  directly  across  the  Mediterranean  and  seemed 
to  them  the  most  natural  field  for  enlargement.  But 
France  also  wished  to  have  Tunis,  and,  acting  with  greater 
promptness  and  decision,  she  took  it,  though  the  Italians 
continued  to  be  more  numerous  there  than  the  French. 
Some  years  before,  an  Italian  steamship  company  had  ob- 
tained a  port  at  the  southern  end  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  after 


German 
colonial 
administra- 
tion 


Italian 
colonization 


488 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Defeat    in 
Abyssinia 


Tripoli 


Spain  and 
Portugal 


1882  Italy  built  up  from  this  the  colony  of  Eritrea.  Seven 
years  later  she  obtained  Italian  Somaliland,  some  distance 
to  the  south,  lying  on  the  Indian  Ocean.  Between  these 
two  possessions  lay  the  old  mountainous  Kingdom  of  Abys- 
sinia, inhabited  by  hardy  tribesmen  who  from  ancient 
times  had  professed  the  Christian  faith.  Over  Abyssinia 
the  Italian  government  tried  to  establish  a  protectorate, 
but  the  inhabitants  of  the  country  would  by  no  means 
submit,  and  in  1896  inflicted  a  terrible  defeat  on  an  invad- 
ing Italian  army  at  Adowa.  Ten  years  after  Italy  joined 
with  Great  Britain  and  France  in  acknowledging  the  in- 
dependence of  the  country. 

About  this  time  the  Italians  turned  their  attention  to 
North  Africa  once  more.  In  1901  the  Italians  and  the 
French  had  settled  their  differences,  and  it  was  understood 
that  France  recognized  the  paramount  interest  of  Italy 
in  the  country  of  Tripoli.  Once  all  the  north  coast  of 
Africa  from  Algeria  to  Suez  had  been  subject  to  Constanti- 
nople, though  often  the  authority  was  nominal  only.  But 
in  the  course  of  the  nineteenth  century  Algeria  and  Tunis 
had  been  taken  by  France,  and  Egypt  occupied  by  the 
British;  now  only  Tripoli  and  Cyrenaica  remained. 
In  1911  Italy  suddenly  demanded  that  the  Sultan  yield 
these  districts.  When  this  was  refused  an  army  of  inva- 
sion was  sent,  and  after  a  year  of  fighting  Turkey  was 
forced  to  cede  them.  The  natives  of  the  interior,  however, 
long  continued  a  harassing  conflict  which  cost  the  Italians 
dear  in  money  and  men. 

Some  of  the  lesser  powers  like  Spain,  Portugal,  and 
Holland,  still  retained  important  colonial  dominions,  the 
relics  of  what  had  been  won  in  their  great  days  of  long  be- 
fore, while  in  the  nineteenth  century  Belgium  obtained  a 
magnificent  domain  in  Africa,  rich  in  tropical  resources. 
In  1898  Spain  lost  to  the  United  States  nearly  all  of  what 
still  remained  of  her  colonies :  Cuba,  Porto  Rico,  and  the 
Philippine    Islands.     Portugal   had  long  since  lost    the 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      489 


best  of  her  colonies  to  the  Dutch,  from  whom  some  had 
been  taken  by  the  British,  but  she  still  retained,  in 
addition  to  some  islands  and  trading  stations,  two  large 
possessions  on  the  opposite  coasts  of  southern  Africa, 
Angola  in  the  west,  and  Portuguese  East  Africa  which 
included  Mozambique. 

The  Dutch  had  long  since  lost  their  important  settlement 
at  the  mouth  of  the  Hudson  in  North  America,  and  in 
South  America  Brazil,  both  held  only  a  short  time,  though 
in  the  northern  part  of  South  America  they  still  retained 
Dutch  Guiana.  Of  the  other  possessions  which  they  had 
won  long  ago  South  Africa  and  Ceylon  had  been  lost  to  the 
British,  but  they  still  held  the  great  Spice  Islands  of  the 
Malay  Archipelago,  off  southeastern  Asia,  Java,  Borneo, 
Sumatra,  Celebes,  and  the  western  part  of  New  Guinea, 
the  largest  island  in  the  world,  which  they  shared  with 
the  British  and  the  Germans. 

The  Dutch  colonial  empire  for  a  great  while  had  yielded 
vast  stores  of  raw  materials  and  large  revenue  to  Holland. 
It  was  far  more  valuable  than  the  colonies  of  the  German 
Empire  and  for  a  long  time  more  valuable  than  what 
France  had.  It  made  Holland  much  more  important  than 
she  would  otherwise  have  been,  and  also  constituted  a 
mortgage  upon  her  political  actions.  To  Germans,  who 
hoped  for  the  later  inclusion  of  Holland  with  their  larger 
empire,  the  Dutch  islands  near  Asia  seemed  a  splendid 
addition  to  be  made  to  the  German  colonies;  while  Holland, 
not  a  great  naval  power  herself,  could  never  afford  to  offend 
the  powers  who  commanded  the  sea  lest  she  lose  her  distant 
possessions.  It  should  be  said  that  generally  these  col- 
onies were  ruled  primarily  in  the  interests  of  Holland,  with 
a  view  to  furthering  trade,  and  with  no  great  efforts  made 
for  the  interests  or  advancement  of  the  natives. 

Belgium  did  not  get  independence  until  1831,  but 
within  half  a  century  she  had  obtained  a  magnificent 
African  possession.     Following  the  explorations  of  Liv- 


The  Dutch 
colonies 


Dutch 
colonial 
administra- 
tion 


The 

Belgian 

Congo 


490  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

ingstone  and  Stanley  in  central  Africa  and  the  revel- 
ations which  they  made  of  the  possibilities  and  resources 
of  this  region,  Leopold  II  of  Belgium,  after  a  confer- 
ence of  the  powers  held  at  Brussels,  founded  what  he 
called  the  International  Association  of  the  Congo.  He 
presently  obtained  the  sanction  of  the  Conference  of 
Powers,  which  met  at  Berlin  in  1884,  to  make  of  the 
Congo  region  an  independent  neutral  jurisdiction,  the 
Congo  Free  State,  of  which  in  the  following  year  he 
became  sovereign.  He  had  invested  large  sums  of  money 
in  this  enterprise,  but  now  taking  for  himself  great  tracts 
of  the  rubber  country  as  a  personal  domain,  he  began 
to  reap  a  huge  fortune  from  it.  This  was  accomplished 
partly  by  forcing  the  natives  to  labor,  and  such  stories 
of  cruel  brutality  began  to  spread  around  the  world 
that  the  administration  of  the  Congo  became  a  great 
scandal.  After  much  contention  the  rights  of  Leopold 
were  purchased  by  the  Belgian  Government  in  1908, 
the  Congo  Free  State  was  annexed  by  Belgium,  and 
reforms  were  introduced  there. 
Imperialism  Imperialism,  the  getting  and  holding  of  colonial  empire, 

was  probably  an  inevitable  stage  in  the  evolution  of  man- 
kind. It  resulted  partly  from  the  superior  power  of  some 
of  the  European  nations  and  their  greater  ambitions,  which 
developed,  partly  from  the  changes  that  accompanied 
the  Industrial  Revolution.  After  the  railroad  and  the 
steamship  the  world  seemed  smaller  and  its  parts  were 
brought  closer  together.  As  a  consequence  of  the  changes 
of  the  nineteenth  century  the  population  and  the  industries 
of  Europe  greatly  expanded.  The  surplus  population  of 
England,  Italy,  and  Germany  went  outside  to  other  places. 
Australia,  New  Zealand,  Canada,  South  Africa  were  all 
built  up  by  such  emigration,  while  the  abler  or  the  more 
adventurous  went  forth  to  such  countries  as  India  and 
Egypt  to  direct  and  govern  the  natives.  Moreover,  the 
expanding  industrialism  of  countries  like  the  German 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      491 


Empire  and  Great  Britain  fostered  an  increasing  popula- 
tion which  could  not  be  supported  by  domestic  agriculture, 
and  which  could  get  its  food  only  by  selling  manufactured 
products  abroad.  Often  it  seemed  to  imperialists  that 
these  manufactures  could  be  best  sold  to  colonial  posses- 
sions, and  it  was  true  that  the  colonies  of  Britain  and 
France  purchased  many  things  from  them.  Furthermore 
industrialism  depended  on  a  supply  of  raw  products.  A 
considerable  portion  of  such  raw  materials  was  in  the  great 
colonial  empires,  especially  of  Great  Britain,  Holland, 
and  France.  After  the  old  colonial  system  was  ended  in 
the  earlier  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  Britain  did  not 
bar  other  countries  from  trading  with  her  colonies,  but  some 
powers  were  not  so  liberal,  and  there  was  always  the  possi- 
bility that  a  state  might  attempt  to  monopolize  its  colonial 
products.  So  German  imperialists  believed  it  necessary  for 
Germany's  greatness  that  lands  producing  cotton,  copper, 
rubber,  and  other  materials  should  be  taken  and  held. 

Even  when  it  was  doubtful  whether  the  mass  of  the 
people  would  be  benefited  by  colonial  acquisitions,  and 
very  doubtful  whether  colonies  were  wanted  by  them, 
individuals  who  hoped  to  get  special  privileges  of  great 
wealth,  or  who  wanted  protection  for  their  investments, 
were  often  able  to  arouse  the  patriotism  of  the  rest  of  the 
people  and  their  love  of  greatness  and  glory  for  their  coun- 
try and  lead  them  on  to  support  colonial  adventure.  Just 
as  small  businesses  were  being  consolidated  into  large 
corporations,  so  a  great  part  of  the  resources  of  the 
earth  were  being  assembled  in  possession  of  a  few  great 
powers;  and  it  seemed  to  many  that  the  future  lay  only 
with  those  powers,  hke  Russia  and  the  United  States, 
which  had  vast  territory  in  which  to  expand  and  enlarge, 
or  with  those  like  Great  Britain  and  France,  which  had 
got  colonies  over  the  sea.  The  Germans'  desire  to  get  more 
territory  or  colonies  while  time  still  remained,  was  probably 
one  of  the  major  causes  of  the  Great  War. 


Patriotism 

and 

colonies 


492 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Subject 
colonial   . 
populations 


The  subject  populations  were,  probably,  on  the  whole, 
better  off  than  they  would  have  been  if  left  to  themselves. 
That  some  of  them  were  harshly  and  cruelly  treated,  that 
at  best  they  had  usually  an  inferior  status,  that  they  were 
often  exploited,  that  they  were  ruled  by  aliens,  that  democ- 
racy and  self-government  were  never  extended  to  them, 
that  they  were  denied  many  things  which  their  European 
masters  had,  is  most  true.  If  all  this  be  considered  from 
the  point  of  view  of  what  European  liberals  wanted  for 
themselves,  it  is  very  lamentable  indeed.  But  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  people  of  Algeria,  of  India,  of  Egypt 
and  of  Burma  had  not  been  able  to  develop  democracy 
or  much  well-being  for  the  masses;  that  the  negroes  of 
Africa  were  far  down  in  the  scale  of  mankind  and  that 
those  who  could  survive  were  being  rapidly  lifted  up 
through  whole  stages  of  human  progress.  Whatever  evils 
attended  imperialism,  and  they  were  not  few  or  small,  it 
is  probable  that  the  peoples  affected  were  benefited  and 
prepared  for  things  better  to  come.  It  is  certain,  also,  that 
Americans  and  Englishmen  and  Frenchmen  were  coming 
to  have  greater  concern  for  their  responsibilities  and  ever 
greater  desire  to  improve  the  condition  of  the  peoples  whom 
they  ruled. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General:  Paul  Leroy-Beaulieu,  De  la  Colonisation  chez  les 
Pewples  ModerneSy  2  vols.  (6th  ed.  1908);  Alfred  Zimmermann, 
Die  Europdische  Kolonieriy  5  vols.  (1896-1903),  with  bibliograph- 
ies and  maps. 

The  British  Empire:  E.  G.  Hawke,  The  British  Empire  and  Its 
History  (1911);  C.  F.  La  veil  and  C.  E.  Payne,  Imperial  England 
(1919);  Sir  C.  P.  Lucas,  The  British  Empire  (1915),  A  Historical 
Geography  of  the  British  Colonies,  12  vols.  (ed.  1916) ;  The  Ox- 
ford Survey  of  the  British  Empire,  ed.  by  A.  J.  Herbertson  and 
O.  J.  R.  Howarth,  6  vols.  (1914) ;  A.  J.  Sargent,  Seaways  of  the 
Empire  (1918);  W.  H.  Woodward,  A  Short  History  of  the  Ex- 
pansion of  the  British  Empire,  1500-1911  (3d  ed.  1912).  H.  E. 
Egerton,  Federations  and  Unions  within  the  British  Empire 
(1911);  R.  Jebb,  The  Imperial  Conference,  %  vols.  (1911). 


COLONIES  AND  EXPANSION      493 

Egypt:  Earl  of  Cromer,  Modem  Egypt,  2  vols.  (1908),  best 
account  of;  C.  de  Freycinet,  La  Question  d^Egypte  (1905); 
Alfred  (Lord)  Milner,  England  in  Egypt  (1892) ;  A.  E.  P.  B.  Wei- 
gall,  A  History  of  Events  in  Egypt  from  1798  to  19U  (1915). 

India:  V.  A.  Smith,  The  Oxford  History  of  India:  from  the 
Earliest  Times  to  the  End  of  1911  (1919),  excellent  for  an  intro- 
duction; Sir  T.  W.  Holderness,  Peoples  and  Problems  of  India 
(1912),  excellent;  Sir  Courtney  Ilbert,  The  Government  of  India 
(3d  ed.  1915). 

South  Africa :  F.  R.  Cana,  South  Africa  from  the  Great  Trek 
to  the  Union  (1909);  G.  E.  Cory,  The  Rise  of  South  Africa,  vol- 
umes I-III  (1910-19).  On  the  Boer  War:  The  Times  History 
of  the  War  in  South  Africa,  1899-1900,  edited  by  L.  S.  Amery, 
4  vols.  (1900) 

The  French  colonies:  Marcel  Dubois  and  Auguste  Terrier, 
Un  Steele  d'Expansion  Coloniale,  1800-1900  (ed.  1902) ;  Emile 
Levasseur,  La  France  et  Ses  Colonies,  S  vols.  (1890-3);  Alfred 
Rambaud  and  others.  La  France  Coloniale  (6th  ed.  1893). 

The  German  Colonies:  Kurt  Hassert,  Deutschland' s  Kolonien 
(2d  ed.  1910);  P.  E.  Lewin,  The  Germans  and  Africa  (1915); 
H.  Mayer,  Das  Deutsche  Kolonialreich,  2  vols.  (1909);  Alfred 
Zimmermann,  Geschichte  der  Deutsche  Kolonialpolitik  (1914). 

Africa:  Baron  Beyens,  La  Question  Africaine  (1918);  N.  D. 
Harris,  Intervention  and  Colonization  in  Africa  (1914);  Sir  H.H. 
Johnston,  A  History  of  the  Colonization  of  Africa  by  Alien  Races 
(1899),  The  Opening  up  of  Africa  (1911);  E.  L.  Castellani,  Le 
Colonic  e  la  Conferenza  di  Berlino  (1885),  best  on  this  subject; 
Sir  Edward  Hertslet,  The  Map  of  Africa  by  Treaty  3  vols.  (2d 
ed.  1896);  and  H.  A.  Gibbons,  The  New  Map  of  Africa  (1916). 

Asia  in  general:  A.  T.  Mahan,  The  Problem  of  Asia  (1900); 
H.  A.  Gibbons,  The  New  Map  of  Asia  (1900-1911)  (1919). 

The  Far  East:  Sir  R.  K.  Douglas,  Europe  and  the  Far  East, 
1506-1912  (1913),  best;  E.  Driault,  La  Question  d' Extreme  Ori- 
ent (1908),  excellent. 

China:  H.  Cordier,  Histoire  des  Relations  de  la  Chine  avec  les 
Puissances  Occidentales,  1860-1902  (1902);  H.  A.  Giles,  China 
and  the  Chinese  (1902),  The  Civilization  of  China  (1911),  China 
and  the  Manchus  (1912),  all  excellent  for  the  beginner:  H.  H. 
Gowen,  An  Outline  History  of  China  (1913). 

Japan:  K.  K.  Kawakami,  Japan  in  World  Politics  (1917); 
Lancelot  Lawton,  Empires  of  the  Far  East,  2  vols.  (1912), 
about  Japan,  China,  and  Manchuria. 


CHAPTER    IX 


TRIPLE    ALLIANCE    AND 
ENTENTES 


THE 


Pre- 
eminence 
of  the  Ger- 
man Empire, 
1871-1904 


I'aigle  provoque  prendra  son  vol,  saisira  rennemi  dan  ses 
serres  acerees,  et  le  rendra  inoffensif.  Nous  nous  souviendrons 
alors  que  les  provinces  de  I'aneien  empire  allemand:  Comte  de 
Bourgogne  et  une  belle  part  de  la  Lorraine,  sont  encore  aux  mains 
des  Francs;  que  des  milliers  de  freres  allemands  des  provinces  bal- 
tiques  gemissent  sous  le  joug  slave.  C'est  une  question  nationale 
de  rendre  a  I'Allemagne  ce  qu'eUe  a  autrefois  possede. 

Alleged  secret  German  official  report,  communicated  by  the 
French  Minister  of  War  to  the  French  Minister  of  Foreign 
AflFairs,  April  2,  1913. 

Immer  enger  werden  die  Maschen  des  Netzes,  in  die  es  der  franz- 
osische  Diplomatic  gelingt,  England  zu  verstricken.  Schon  in  den 
ersten  Phasen  des  Marokkokonflickts  hat  bekanntlich  England  an 
Frankreich  Zusagen  militarischer  Natur  gemacht.  .  .  .  Die 
Englische  Flotte  iibemimmt  den  Schutz  der  Nordsee,  des  Kanals 
und  des  Atlantischen  Ozeans.  .  .  .  Die  Englische  Regierung 
spielt  ein  gefahrliches  Spiel. 

A  report  of   1913,  published   in   the  Norddeutsche  Allgemeine 

Zeitung,  October  16,  1914. 

For  a  generation  after  the  Franco-Prussian  War  the 
German  Empire  enjoyed  undisputed  preeminence  in 
Europe,  not  only  because  of  its  own  enormous  strength, 
but  from  the  fact  that  it  was  the  head  of  the  Triple  Alliance 
with  Italy  and  Austria-Hungary.  Even  after  the  ar- 
rangement between  France  and  Russia  in  1893  the  su- 
premacy of  Germany  was  not  seriously  disturbed.  The 
Dual  Alliance  was  regarded  with  suspicion  not  only  by 
the  rival  alliance  but  by  Great  Britain  as  well.  Therefore, 
down  to  1900,  at  least,  and  actually  for  a  few  years  after 

494 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES       495 


that  time,  the  German  Empire  continued  to  be  what  it 
had  been  during  the  later  period  of  Bismarck,  the  dom- 
inant power  on  the  Continent  of  Europe.  And  indeed  it 
did  more  than  hold  its  place,  for,  ambition  increasing  with 
the  marvelous  expansion  of  its  power,  it  became  year  by 
year  stronger  and  more  magnificent  to  friends  and  admirers, 
more  threatening  and  terrible  to  the  others.  It  was  this 
increase  in  power  and  ambition  that  brought  about  the 
large  diplomatic  changes  that  now  came  to  pass. 

Hitherto  the  weaker  Dual  Alliance  had  confronted 
the  stronger  Triple  Alliance  with  Britain,  on  the  outskirts 
of  Europe,  usually  more  friendly  toward  Germany  than 
either  Russia  or  France.  But  in  1904  England  and 
France  settled  their  differences  and  made  an  arrangement, 
the  Entente  Cordiale,  which  was  not  an  alliance  but  in  the 
end  proved  to  be  just  as  effective  as  one.  And  three  years 
later,  when  England  and  Russia  settled  their  differences 
also,  in  the  Anglo-Russian  Accord,  Dual  Alliance  and 
Entente  Cordiale  coalesced  in  a  vaster  combination,  the 
Triple  Entente.  Thereafter  Europe  was  divided  by  two 
great  combinations.  And  the  Triple  Entente  was  so 
strong  that  Germany's  old  position  of  easy  superiority 
was  gone.  German  leaders  did  try  to  get  back  to  the  old 
position  and  dictate  their  will  to  the  others.  Five  times 
they  attempted  this,  and  each  time  a  great  crisis  resulted. 
On  two  of  these  occasions,  the  Morocco  Crisis  of  1905,  and 
the  Affair  of  Bosnia-Herzegovina  in  1908-9,  Germany  won 
signal  triumph,  and  seemed  to  have  mastery  once  more. 
Twice,  in  the  Morocco  Crisis  of  1911  and  the  crisis  which 
arose  concerning  the  Balkans  in  1912,  discomfiture  came. 
Each  time,  in  the  end,  war  was  avoided.  But  the  tension 
gradually  became  so  great  that  more  and  more  people 
believed  another  such  difference  would  make  it  difficult  to 
avoid  war  again.  The  fifth  crisis  came  in  1914,  after  the 
Austrian  ultimatum  to  Servia.  Then  the  dread  catas- 
trophe came. 


Europe 

divided, 

1904-14 


The  great 
crisis 


Great 

Britmin 
and  France 


The  Entente 

Cordiale, 

1904 


496  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

The  origin  of  the  Entente  Cordiale  may  be  traced  to  one 
great  cause,  fear  of  the  German  Empire.  England  and 
France  had  been  rivals  or  enemies  for  ages,  and  so  different 
were  the  character  and  ideals  of  the  two  that  rarely  had 
they  been  able  to  regard  each  other  with  muqh  of  sympathy 
and  understanding.  As  late  as  1898  England  and  France 
had  been  very  near  war.  But  France  had  once  been 
under  the  German's  heel  and  had  never  forgotten;  for 
thirty  years  she  had  lived  right  beside  a  neighbor  who 
had  often  been  arrogant  and  sometimes  threatening;  Ger- 
many was  growing  in  population  and  power  so  much  more 
rapidly  than  France  as  to  make  Frenchmen  see  that  in 
another  war  they  could  have  little  chance,  and  a  new  school 
of  French  leaders  believed  that  some  day  such  a  conflict 
could  not  be  avoided.  Accordingly,  after  1898,  with  the 
passing  of  Hanotaux,  who  disliked  Britain  and  preferred 
German  friendship,  a  new  group  came  into  power,  among 
whom  Theophile  Delcasse  shortly  became  most  important. 
It  was  their  belief  that  France  had  best  seek  the  friendship 
of  England. 

The  old  school  was  passing  in  Great  Britain  also.  Vic- 
toria's German  husband  had  died  long  before,  she  herself 
died  in  1901,  and  a  year  later  the  Marquis  of  Salisbury. 
The  German  naval  laws  of  1898  and  1900  were  making  the 
new  generation  of  Englishmen  have  an  apprehension  of 
Germany  that  those  before  never  had.  It  began  to  be 
said  that  Britain  could  no  longer,  such  were  the  new  con- 
ditions, afford  to  maintain  her  "splendid  isolation;"  that 
she  must  have  her  own  friends  to  stand  with  if  there  were 
need.  So,  iu  1904  France  and  England  signed  an  agree- 
ment by  which  they  amicably  adjusted  all  their  differences 
everywhere,  France  acquiescing  in  the  British  occupation 
of  Egypt,  against  which  she  had  often  protested,  and  Bri- 
tain promising  to  support  France  in  her  plan  to  get  posses- 
sion of  Morocco :  "  The  two  governments  agree  to  afford 
one  another  their  diplomatic  support."     It  was  afterward 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES       497 


seen,  on  the  publication  of  the  secret  articles  in  1911,  that 
the  two  powers,  while  not  making  an  alliance,  had  given 
each  other  assurances  of  assistance,  if  that  were  needed. 
In  1904  an  alliance  was  not,  perhaps,  desired,  and  would 
probably  not  have  been  tolerated  by  many  people  in  either 
of  the  countries.  Moreover,  it  was  said  then  that  Ger- 
many would  have  gone  to  war  to  prevent  it. 

When  the  terms  of  the  Entente  were  made  known  Ger- 
many seemed  at  first  to  make  slight  objection  to  it;  but  a 
little  later  she  intervened  with  terrible  brusqueness. 
March  31,  1905  the  Kaiser  suddenly  landed  at  Tangier, 
opposite  Gibraltar,  in  Morocco,  and  told  the  Sultan  that 
he  would  uphold  his  sovereign  power.  To  France  this 
was  as  direct  a  challenge  as  could  be  made,  for  following 
the  Entente  agreement  Frenchmen  were  making  ready  to 
end  the  anarchy  which  had  long  existed  in  Morocco,  and 
round  out  their  north  African  empire  by  taking  Morocco 
themselves.  After  the  Kaiser's  sudden  assertion  it  was 
evident  that  France  must,  at  Germany's  behest,  give  up 
the  enterprise  or  risk  almost  certain  war. 

The  moment  was  well  chosen  for  Germany's  move. 
France  herself  was  not  in  condition  to  fight  a  great  war. 
It  was  by  no  means  certain  as  yet  how  far  Britain  would 
support  her,  or,  in  view  of  political  conditions  in  the  British 
Isles,  how  far  she  could  give  support.  Worst  of  all,  no 
help  could  be  expected  from  Russia.  She  was  involved  in 
a  war  with  Japan,  in  which  she  had  undergone  repeated 
defeats,  and  just  suffered  the  great  disaster  of  Mukden. 
In  the  course  of  the  struggle  rebellion  and  disorder  had 
arisen  in  her  realm  so  that  she  was  now  distracted  and 
weak,  and  her  condition  was  such  that  years  of  recupera- 
tion were  needed.  Furthermore,  the  German  Emperor 
had  been  secretly  intriguing  with  the  Tsar,  over  whose 
weak  character  his  own  obtained  easy  ascendancy.  He 
was  busily  endeavoring  to  have  Russia  attach  herself  to 
Germany  against  England,  who,  he  said,  was  the  real 


The    Kaiser 
at  Tangier 


France  not 
able    to    re- 
sist 
Germany 


498 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


S«cret 
treaty  of 
Bjdrko,  1905 


The  first 
Morocco 
crisis,  1905 


The 

ConfciTence 
of  Algeciras, 
1906 


enemy,  and  have  her  bring  France  into  a  continental 
combination  which  Germany  should  lead.  A  few  months 
after  this  time,  indeed,  in  July  1905,  the  Kaiser  and  Tsar 
met  on  board  a  vessel  at  Bjorko  in  the  Baltic,  and  there 
signed  a  secret  treaty.  This  engagement  was  not  ac- 
cepted by  the  Russian  government,  but  such  negotiations 
temporarily  weakened  the  Dual  Alliance. 

It  was  a  terrible  moment  for  France;  but  she  was  not 
prepared  to  fight,  and  so  had  to  yield  to  a  great  humilia- 
tion. There  was  in  Paris  at  this  time  a  German,  Count 
Haenckel  von  Donnersmarck,  unofficial  representative  of 
the  Kaiser.  To  a  French  newspaper  he  gave  out  an 
interview  the  meaning  of  which  was  not  to  be  mistaken: 
Delcasse's  policy  was  dangerous  to  Germany  and  was 
leading  to  war;  in  such  a  war  France  might  win,  but  if  she 
did  not  the  peace  would  be  dictated  in  Paris;  he  meant  his 
advice  kindly — "Give  up  the  minister."  And  this  was 
done,  for  as  late  as  1905  Germany  could  still  command  and 
France  obey.  Delcasse  was  forced  to  resign,  and  France 
compelled  not  only  to  yield  with  respect  to  Morocco,  but 
virtually  forced  to  appear  before  a  European  conference, 
called  to  meet  at  Algeciras,  over  the  bay  from  Gibraltar. 

Germany  had  gone  too  far,  and  at  the  conference  less 
was  gained  than  six  months  before.  The  French  had  dili- 
gently strengthened  their  military  resources,  and  the 
English,  who  had  perhaps  been  more  willing  to  go  to  war 
than  the  French  in  1905,  continued  resolute,  while  Russia 
was  now  at  peace.  The  French  presented  their  case  much 
more  skilfully  than  the  Germans,  who  had  relied  too 
greatly  on  display  of  force,  and  France  gained  a  large  part 
of  what  she  wanted;  for  to  France  and  Spain  jointly  was 
given  the  task  of  preserving  order  in  Morocco.  The  re- 
sults of  the  affair  were  none  the  less  a  large  triumph  for 
Germany.  She  had  not,  indeed,  succeeded  in  breaking  up 
the  Entente  Cordiale,  which  she  much  desired  to  accom- 
plish, and  it  was  seen  now  that  the  agreement  was  stronger 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES       499 


than  ever;  nor  had  she  imposed  upon  France  as  great  a 
humiliation  as  seemed  likely  at  first.  But  she  had  forbidden 
France  to  take  Morocco;  France  had  yielded,  and  at  Ger- 
many's behest  a  French  minister  of  foreign  affairs  had  been 
driven  from  office.  Apparently  the  position  of  Germany 
was  as  high  as  when  France  stood  almost  alone. 

If  fear  of  Germany  and  trend  of  diplomatic  events  had 
drawn  France  and  Great  Britain  togetker,  the  same  forces 
tended  to  draw  together  Russia  and  Great  Britain,  and 
in  effect  form  a  combination  of  Great  Britain,  Russia,  and 
France.  This  was  made  easier  because  of  the  Russo- 
Japanese  War.  After  1905,  Russia,  defeated  in' Asia,  seemed 
less  dangerous  to  Britain  than  before,  at  the  same  time 
that  she  turned  back  to  Europe,  and,  as  was  soon  seen, 
entered  into  rivalry  with  the  German  Empire  rather  than 
Great  Britain.  This  took  place  when  British  suspicion 
and  dread  of  Germany  were  steadily  increasing.  It  took 
place  also  at  a  time  when  France,  the  ally  of  Russia,  was 
becoming  ever  more  closely  bound  to  England.  The  result 
of  all  these  factors  was  that  in  1907  the  British  and  the 
Russian  governments  settled  their  differences  in  friendly 
and  generous  spirit,  much  as  France  and  England  had  done 
shortly  before.  In  this  agreement  Russia  acknowledged 
controlling  influence  in  Afghanistan  and  in  Thibet  by 
Britain,  who  thus  got  a  secure  frontier  for  India,  and  Persia 
was  practically  divided  between  the  two  of  them. 
After  1907  there  were,  over  against  the  Triple  Alliance, 
the  secret  agreement  between  Russia  and  France,  the 
Entente  Cordiale  of  Great  Britain  and  France,  and  the 
Anglo-Russian  Accord  of  Great  Britain  and  Russia.  These 
three  arrangements  now  came  to  be  spoken  of  together 
as  the  Triple  Entente,  and  for  the  next  seven  years  men 
understood  that  Europe  was  dominated  by  the  two  rival 
combinations,  Triple  Alliance  and  Triple  Entente. 

But  while  this  was  destined  to  check  Germany  soon,  it 
could  not  do  so  at  once;  and  in  the  very  next  year  in 


Great 
Britain 
and  Russia 


The    Anglo- 
Russian 
Accord,  1907 


The    Triple 

Entente, 

1907-14 


The  Bosnia- 
Herzegovina 
crisis,  1908-9 


500 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The   Dual 
Monarchy 
annexes 
Bosnia  and 
Herzegovina 


company  with  her  principal  ally  she  secured  another  more 
signal  triumph.  This  time  it  was  in  the  east  of  Europe, 
and  had  to  do  with  the  greatest  of  Teutonic  interests,  con- 
trol of  the  Balkans.  In  1908  Austria-Hungary  annexed 
Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  in  spite  of  a  general  European 
treaty,  and  in  direct  defiance  of  Russia. 

By  the  Treaty  of  Berlin  the  two  Turkish  provinces  of 
Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  had  been  put  under  the  control 
of  Austria-Hungary,  though  sovereignty  continued  to  be 
vested  in  Turkey.  Actual  connection  with  Turkey  ceased, 
however,  and  the  government  of  the  Dual  Monarchy  set  to 
work  to  bring  order  to  the  districts  and  make  them  thor- 
oughly subservient  to  its  rule.  The  people  were  largely 
debarred  from  professional  and  government  positions  and 
treated  as  inferior  to  Hungarians  or  Germans,  but  consid- 
erable material  prosperity  was  brought  about,  and  in 
many  respects  the  condition  of  the  South  Slavs  in  these 
provinces  was  better  than  that  of  those  who  ruled  them- 
selves in  Servia  and  Montenegro.  As  time  went  on, 
therefore,  Austria-Hungary  came  to  regard  them  as  part 
of  her  dominion,  and  Turkish  ownership  as  a  fiction.  Thus 
things  continued  until  1908.  In  that  year  occurred  the 
so-called  Young  Turk  revolution  in  the  Ottoman  Empire. 
Ignoring  the  Austrian  possession  of  Bosnia  and  Herzego- 
vina, the  Young  Turks  invited  the  population  of  the 
provinces  to  send  representatives  to  an  assembly  in  Con- 
stantinople. This  seemed  an  attempt  to  prepare  for 
Turkish  possession  of  the  country  again  later  on.  But 
complete  mastery  of  the  district  was  now  necessary  for  the 
Teutonic  scheme  of  controlling  the  way  down  to  Turkey 
and  the  greater  domain  across  the  straits.  Under  no  cir- 
cumstances would  either  Germany  or  Austria  see  the  loss  of 
Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  threatened,  and  so  Austria  acted 
at  once.  October  3d,  the  Dilal  Monarchy  cast  aside  the 
Treaty  of  Berlin,  without  consulting  the  other  parties  to 
the  treaty,  and  annoimced  that  the  provinces  were  annexed. 


i£ 


J 


^   o-i 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES       501 


A  dangerous  crisis  ensued.  Turkey,  most  directly  ag- 
grieved, strongly  protested,  but  could  do  nothing,  and 
after  a  while  accepted  pecuniary  compensation.  Great 
Britain  and  France,  who  had  signed  the  Treaty  of  Berlin, 
protested.  To  Russia — also  a  signatory,  and  much  more 
greatly  interested  because  of  her  position  and  ambition 
in  the  Balkans — the  affront  was  far  greater  and  she  insisted 
that  the  matter  be  laid  before  a  European  congress.  Most 
furious  of  all  was  Servia,  the  neighboring  South  Slavic 
state,  who  had  long  hoped  that,  on  the  breaking  up  of 
European  Turkey,  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  would  be  hers. 
If  now  the  provinces  were  finally  incorporated  into  Austria- 
Hungary,  then  the  dream  of  future  Servian  greatness 
would  never  be  realized.  Accordingly,  while  Russia  was 
prepared  to  oppose  the  action  as  strongly  as  she  could, 
Servia  was  resolved  to  fight  to  the  death,  and  could  with 
difficulty  be  restrained  from  attacking  her  powerful  neigh- 
bor. 

Austria  was  willing  that  a  European  congress  should  be 
called,  but  the  taking  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  must  be 
regarded  as  a  fait  accompli.  Russia  resisted  firmly,  and 
was  supported  by  her  two  partners  in  the  Triple  Entente. 
Servia,  believing  that  she  would  be  helped  by  Russia,  made 
ready  for  war.  With  grave  and  anxious  months  the  winter 
of  1908-9  passed  slowly.  Then  suddenly  the  crisis  was 
ended  when  Germany  decisively  intervened.  She  was 
apparently  in  the  delicate  position  of  having  to  offend  one 
of  her  friends.  She  had  enormous  interests  in  Turkey; 
not  less  important  was  the  alliance  with  the  Dual  Mon- 
archy, whose  position  she  would  maintain  at  all  costs. 
But  her  very  able  Ambassador  in  Constantinople,  Von 
Bieberstein,  persuaded  the  Young  Turks  that  it  was  best 
to  accept  the  inevitable,  and  Turkey  and  Austria  came  to 
agreement.  Meanwhile  Germany  gave  full  support  to 
Austria  against  Russia  and  the  Entente.  German  troops 
were  massed  in  formidable  array  along  the  Russian  fron- 


Russia    and 
Servia  in 
the  crisis 


Germany 
compels 
Russia 
to  yield, 
1909 


* 'Shining 
armor" 


502 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Imposing 
position  of 
Germany, 
1909-11 


The  Pots- 
dam Accord, 
1910 


tier,  so  that  afterward  the  Kaiser  could  say  that  he  had 
stood  forth  beside  his  ally  "  in  shining  armor."  A  messen- 
ger was  sent  to  the  Tsar,  presumably  to  ask  whether  Aus- 
tria's action  were  satisfactory.  Russia  was  in  no  condition 
to  fight,  for  she  had  recovered  little  as  yet  from  the  disas- 
ters of  the  war  with  Japan,  and  it  was  doubtful  whether 
England,  perhaps  France,  would  be  willing  to  fight  because 
of  the  Balkans  where  they  had  no  direct  interest.  So 
Russia  yielded  suddenly  and  completely.  At  the  end  of 
Marchjthe  Russian  government  declared  that  it  recognized 
the  annexation  as  a  fait  accompli,  and  a  few  days  later 
Servia,  with  bitterest  humiliation  signed  a  document  de- 
claring that  she  renounced  her  attitude  of  protest  against 
the  annexation,  and  would  "live  in  future  on  good,  neigh- 
borly terms"  with  Austria-Hungary. 

Thus  in  1909  Russia  had  been  humiliated  and  rebuffed 
as  France  had  been  in  1905.  In  the  east  as  in  the  west  of 
Europe,  when  Germany  spoke  with  hand  on  the  sword, 
German  word  was  law.  The  old  successes  of  Bismarck 
were  being  revived  and  exceeded.  In  spite  of  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Triple  Entente  the  colossal  power  of  Germany 
was  not  shaken,  and  she  stood  dominant  and  terrifying  as 
never  before.  She  had  given  command  to  France,  and 
Great  Britain  had  not  been  able  to  save  France  from 
yielding;  she  had  spoken  to  Russia  in  behalf  of  her  ally, 
and  Russia  had  yielded  completely.  Austria  was  now 
the  principal  power  interested  in  the  Balkans  as  Germany 
was  in  Turkey;  and  Servia,  the  little  protegS  of  Russia, 
had  been  abandoned  helpless,  and  forced  to  promise  a 
friendship  which  she  loathed.  As  if  to  complete  the  splen- 
did success  which  she  had  gained,  Germany  now  came 
to  a  separate  understanding  with  the  Tsar.  In  November 
1910,  the  Russian  ruler  was  the  guest  of  the  Kaiser  at  Pots- 
dam, and  there  an  agreement  was  made  by  which  Russia's 
position  in  Persia  was  acknowledged,  and  Russia  withdrew 
opposition  to  the  Bagdad  Railway,  which  Germany  wished 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES       503 


to  complete.  So,  not  only  was  the  Entente  shaken  when 
Germany  spoke,  but  one  of  its  members  even  seemed  to 
be  drawing  away. 

This  crisis  had  ended  without  disaster,  but  like  the 
others  it  was  ominous  of  woes  soon  to  come.  The  cynical 
violation  of  the  Treaty  of  Berlin  by  Austria-Hungary  was 
fraught  with  consequences  of  evil.  All  through  the  nine- 
teenth century,  with  the  progress  toward  better  things, 
there  had  been  effort  to  have  the  sanctity  of  treaties  held 
in  reverence.  "Contracting  powers  can  rid  themselves 
of  their  treaty  engagements  only  by  an  understanding  with 
their  co-signatories,"  said  the  Declaration  of  London  in 
1871,  to  which  Austria-Hungary  had  been  a  party.  But 
among  Germans  there  had  been  growing  up  of  late  the 
doctrine  that  treaties  need  not  be  kept  if  they  were  in  op- 
position to  the  good  of  the  state,  and  in  the  more  terrible 
days  of  1914  this  doctrine  was  to  be  reaflSrmed.  The 
result  of  Austria's  action  in  1908  was  to  undermine  public 
confidence  in  treaties  and  international  engagements,  and 
to  make  the  more  cautious  believe  that  such  engagements 
could  be  maintained  only  by  force. 

This  was  the  last  great  diplomatic  triumph  which  Ger- 
many was  destined  to  win.  The  opponents  of  Germany 
and  the  Triple  Alliance  were  coming  more  closely  together, 
and  feeling  that  they  could  count  on  one  another  for  sup- 
port more  certainly  now.  Especially  was  this  the  case  with 
England  and  France;  they  were  strengthening  their  forces, 
and  they  were,  apparently,  strengthening  year  by  year 
their  determination  not  always  to  yield  at  Germany's  be- 
hest. In  France  there  was  going  on  steadily  both  a  revival 
of  courage  and  assurance  and  a  splendid  rebirth  of  national 
feeling.  In  Great  Britain  there  was  each  year  more  appre- 
hensiveness  about  the  German  Empire,  determination  to 
be  on  perpetual  guard,  and  not  let  France  alone  confront 
German  aggression  or  suffer  her  again  to  be  crushed.  The 
policy  of  Russia  was  more  obscure,  and  depended,  appar- 


Inter- 
national 
engage- 
ments 
weakened 


Increasing 
strength  of 
the  Triple 
Entente 


504 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The    second 
Morocco 
crisis,  1911 


Agadir 


ently,  more  on  the  personal  character  of  the  ruler,  who  was 
known  to  be  partly  under  the  Kaiser's  influence  and  largely 
under  that  of  his  German  wife.  Yet,  it  was  evident  that 
Russia's  great  ambitions  were  now  in  the  Balkans,  so  that 
she  was  thus  brought  again  into  direct  rivalry  with  the 
Teutonic  powers,  and  it  was  also  certain  that  she  was  re- 
covering the  strength  lost  at  Mukden  and  Tsushima.  It 
was  very  evident  also  that  the  policy  of  Italy  was  now  in 
conflict  with  that  of  the  Austria-Hungary,  at  the  same  time 
that  Italy  had  renewed  her  friendship  with  France,  so  that 
Italian  support  could  no  longer  be  counted  on  for  Germany 
and  Austria  in  any  great  war.  All  these  factors  had  to  do 
with  the  changes  which  now  took  place. 

The  third  of  the  great  disputes  between  the  opposing 
combinations  came  in  1911,  and  again  it  had  to  do  with 
Morocco.  After  the  Conference  of  Algeciras,  France  went 
steadily  on  with  the  work  which  the  powers  had  committed 
to  her.  She  also  tried  to  come  to  an  understanding  with 
Germany,  and  proceeded  to  get  control  of  Morocco  as  far 
as  she  could.  Under  pretext  of  policing  the  distracted 
country  she  pushed  an  armed  force  farther  and  farther 
into  the  interior.  It  looked  as  though  Morocco  was  about 
to  become  a  French  possession,  whatever  appearances 
were  maintained,  and  Germany  resolved  that  this  should 
not  be  done  without  her  consent  and  without  a  share  of 
the  country  for  herself. 

Without  preliminary  warning,  July  1,  19M,  it  was  an- 
nounced that  German  commercial  interests  in  Morocco 
were  being  threatened,  and  that  hence  a  German  warship 
had  been  sent  to  the  harbor  of  Agadir,  on  the  Atlantic 
coast  of  Morocco,  to  protect  them.  It  was  at  once  ap- 
parent that  German  interests  were  insignificant  in  the 
district,  and  that  there  was  no  unusual  disorder.  Evi- 
dently the  Germans  had  intervened  as  before;  and  at  once 
there  came  a  crisis  which  brought  the  nations  to  the  very 
verge  of  war. 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES      505 


The  moment  had  been  well  chosen.  France  was  torn 
by  socialist  and  industrial  agitation.  There  had  just 
been  a  great  strike  on  the  railroads,  broken  only  when  the 
government  had  mobilized  the  trainmen  as  soldiers  to 
run  the  trains,  and  the  anger  at  this  was  so  great  that  the 
discontented  were  practising  acts  of  sabotage,  wrecking  and 
destroying  wherever  they  could.  Ministries  were  follow- 
ing each  other  in  quick  and  bewildering  succession,  and  the 
government  seemed  weak^and  unstable.  In  Great  Britain 
also  there  was  widespread  industrial  discontent,  and  there 
had  just  been  disorders  in  Liverpool  and  London  greater 
than  people  living  could  remember.  Moreover,  the  coun- 
try was  in  the  very  midst  of  the  great  constitutional 
struggle  over  the  power  of  the  House  of  Lords,  and  the 
people  were  divided  by  a  contest  more  bitter  than  any- 
thing since  the  passage  of  the  Reform  Law  in  1832.  Russia 
had  recently  entered  into  the  Potsdam  agreement  with 
Germany,  and  in  any  event  Russia  was  little  interested  in 
Morocco,  which  concerned  her  directly  not  at  all. 

The  question  now  resolved  itself  into  another  great  con- 
test between  the  Entente  and  the  Alliance,  more  espe- 
cially between  Germany  and  Great  Britain  and  France. 
Between  the  French  and  the  German  governments  began 
a  series  of  "conversations,"  while  France  sought  to  learn 
how  far  Britain  would  give  her  support.  The  French  gov- 
ernment, which  had  itself  effectually  set  aside  the  Algeciras 
agreement,  was  yet  able  to  maintain  that  Germany's  ac- 
tion distinctly  infringed  the  agreement;  while  Germany, 
it  would  seem,  with  more  bluntness,  declared  that  France 
had  made  the  agreement  of  no  force,  and  that,  in  the  new 
order  of  things  which  had  arisen,  Germany  must  have  a 
part  of  Morocco,  or  else,  as  she  hinted,  some  conpensation 
elsewhere.  .—  ; 

In  France  the  German  demands  made  profound  impres- 
sion on  a  people  always  sensitive,  and  then  in  the  midst  of 
a  great  revival  of  patriotic  and  national  feeling.     Ger- 


Britain  and 
France  em- 
barrassed 


The 

diplomatic 

struggle 


Feeling  in 
France    and 
Great 
Britain 


506 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


France 
refuses 
to  yield 


Difficulties 
of  Ger- 
many's 
position 


many*s  action  seemed  harsh  and  unprovoked.  Few  people 
wanted  war,  and  most  Frenchmen  dreaded  it;  but  while 
there  was  from  the  first  a  spirit  of  conciliation  and  no  out- 
burst of  popular  wrath,  there  was  also  an  unexpected  firm- 
ness and  a  decision  not  to  bow  down  again.  In  the  midst 
of  the  negotiations  France  went  steadily  on  arming  and 
preparing  for  the  worst.  In  Britain  also  political  dissen- 
sions were  hushed  and  put  aside  for  the  moment,  as  all 
parties  stood  close  together.  There  was  great  popular 
sympathy  for  France  and  determination  to  support  her. 
It  was  clearly  realized  that  Germany,  already  dangerous 
to  Great  Britain  on  the  seas,  would  be  far  more  so  if  she 
got  possession  of  part  of  Morocco,  in  the  northwest  corner 
of  Africa,  within  easy  striking  distance  of  the  Strait  of  Gib- 
raltar, and  lying  right  on  the  flank  of  the  sea  route  to 
South  Africa,  constituting  thus  a  menace  both  to  Britain's 
short-  and  her  long-water  route  to  the  East.  For  France 
the  presence  of  Germany  there  would  be  no  less  a  trouble 
and  danger.  Germany  could  thus  make  easy  attack  on 
the  French  Empire  in  northern  Africa,  and  it  would  always 
be  possible  for  het  to  stir  up  disaffection  among  the  natives 
of  Algeria  and  Tunis. 

Accordingly,  the  two  powers  stood  resolute  and  un- 
daunted. All  the  French  fleet  was  concentrated  in  the 
Mediterranean,  and  it  was  known  that  Britain's  great  fleet 
was  ready  in  the  Channel  and  in  the  North  Sea.  In  the 
negotiations  which  were  being  carried  on  between  Berlin 
and  Paris,  France,  brought  to  bay,  refused  to  let  Germany 
have  any  share  of  Morocco.  But  if  Germany  would  agree 
to  give  her  a  free  hand  there,  she  would  from  her  other 
possessions  grant  compensation  to  Germany  elsewhere. 

The  German  government  was  soon  in  a  diflScult  position, 
much,  indeed,  like  that  of  the  last  days  of  July  1914. 
Germany  had  intervened  with  bold  determination  two 
times  before;  each  time  her  weaker  opponents  had  yielded, 
and  there  had  been  no  trouble  because  they  had  yielded. 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES       507 

But  now  she  had  spoken  eommandingly  again,  and  this 
time  her  word  was  not  obeyed.  It  presently  became 
apparent  that,  to  enforce  what  she  demanded,  war  might 
be  necessary;  but  the  sociaHsts  were  bitterly  opposed  to 
such  a  war;  most  of  the  people  did  not  feel  that  a  vital 
interest  of  the  nation  was  at  stake;  and  it  could  not  be 
pretended,  as  it  was  three  years  later,  that  Germany  was 
being  attacked  by  envious  foes  who  were  trying  to  effect 
her  destruction.  None  the  less,  an  important  and  influen- 
tial part  of  the  population,  all  those  who  had  been  striving 
for  the  creation  of  a  greater  German  empire  and  for  the 
expansion  of  German  sea  power,  insisted  that  a  part  of 
Morocco  must  be  got,  or  at  the  very  least  certain  coaling- 
stations.  France,  supported  by  Great  Britain,  refused 
firmly  to  consider  giving  Germany  any  part  of  the  coun- 
try; if  however  the  Imperial  Government  acknowledged 
her  absolute  political  supremacy  in  Morocco,  so  that  it 
would  not  in  the  future  be  called  in  question,  then  she 
would  cede  to  Germany  about  a  third  of  her  Congo  terri- 
tory.    From  this  offer  she  would  not  swerve. 

Therefore,  in  the  anxious  weeks  of  August  and  Septem-  The 
ber,  1911,  it  seemed  that  any  day  war  might  break  out.  German 
The  French  people  dreaded  the  prospect  of  such  a  war,  yjeids 
for  they  realized,  as  they  did  so  clearly  in  1914,  that  this 
time  defeat  meant  the  definitive  loss  of  their  position  as  a 
great  power.  But,  encouraged  by  England,  they  stood 
watchful  and  firm.  They  were,  indeed,  in  a  position  far 
different  from  the  earlier  years  when  the  Kaiser  is  reported 
to  have  said  "I  hold  France  in  the  hollow  of  my  hand." 
The  best  judges  believed  that  they  were  superior  to  the 
Germans  in  airplanes  and  field  artillery,  and  there  could 
be  no  doubt  that  the  sea  power  of  the  Entente  was  over- 
whelmingly superior  to  the  German.  Brought  to  the 
time  of  decision  the  German  government  hesitated  at  last. 
It  is  said  that  the  best  advisers  were  consulted  about 
whether  the  present  opportunity  was  favorable  for  war. 


508 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

Morocco 
question 
setUed 


German 
bitterness 
toward 
England 


and  the  answers  were  against  it.  Especially  did  the 
financiers  oppose  a  conflict.  The  French  had  been  con- 
ducting what  they  called  a  "financial  mobilization."  The 
vast  and  expanding  industry  of  Germany  had  been  built 
up  largely  on  borrowed  capital,  much  of  it  supplied  by  the 
French.  If  the  money  foundation  of  this  structure  were 
shaken,  the  whole  edifice  might  topple  down  in  a  great  in- 
dustrial panic.  The  French  were  silently  calling  in  their 
loans,  and  a  colossal  panic  seemed  imminent  with  wide- 
spread economic  ruin.  Accordingly  the  French  proposals 
were  accepted;  there  was  no  war;  and  the  crisis  ended. 

By  the  end  of  September  the  danger  was  past,  and  early 
in  November  an  agreement  was  signed.  Substantially 
France  established  her  protectorate  over  Morocco,  guaran- 
teeing to  all  nations  freedom  and  equality  of  trade;  and  she 
ceded  to  Germany  part  of  her  Congo.  The  arrangement 
was  not  completely  satisfactory,  since  Frenchmen  believed 
that  Germany  had  been  bribed  to  permit  what  she  had  no 
right  to  interfere  in,  and  Germans  were  bitterly  disap- 
pointed that  they  had  obtained  no  part  of  Morocco. 
Germany  had,  it  is  true,  been  so  confident  of  her  strength 
that  she  had  defied  both  England  and  France,  and  she  had 
made  good  her  contention  that  no  important  matter  could 
be  settled  unless  she  were  consulted;  but  she  was  no  longer 
able  to  carry  her  point,  and  if  she  had  hoped  to  drive  Eng- 
land and  France  apart  and  break  up  the  Entente  Cordiale, 
it  was  apparent  now  that  the  understanding  was  closer 
than  before  and  virtually  a  strong  alliance. 

One  of  the  principal  results  of  this  contest  was  increasing 
bitterness  between  Germany  and  Great  Britain  who  had 
supported  France  stoutly.  "We  know  now  the  enemy 
who  loses  no  chance  to  bar  our  way."  This  bitterness  re- 
sulted largely  from  comprehension  that  British  support 
had  made  it  possible  for  France  to  give  to  Germany  the 
greatest  diplomatic  set-back  that  Germans  had  known 
since  before  the  Franco-Prussian  War.     On  all  sides  was 


crisis  of 
1912 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES       509 

expressed  the  determination  to  see  that,  next  time,  the 
Fatherland  would  be  so  prepared  that  there  would  be 
no  receding,  and  it  was  probable  that  if  another  crisis 
found  Germany  ready  she  would  not  again  endure  to  be 
checked. 

But  the  next  crisis  did  not  arise  through  Germany's  The  Balkan 
seeking,  though  it  soon  involved  Austria's  interests  and 
her  own.  After  the  overwhelming  defeat  of  Turkey  in  the 
first  weeks  of  the  First  Balkan  War,  representatives  of  the 
Great  Powers  assembled  in  London  to  discuss  the  startling 
new  problems  just  raised.  Servia  had  not  only  conquered 
territory  which  she  greatly  desired,  biit  she  had  now  the 
chance  of  extending  down  through  Albania  and  getting  an 
outlet  at  last  on  the  sea.  To  this  Austria-Hungary  was 
altogether  opposed.  Not  only  was  Servia  more  hostile 
and  dangerous  to  her  than  any  other  Balkan  state,  but  a 
strong  Servia  resting  on  the  sea  would  really  block  her 
hoped-for  extension  down  toward  the  iEgean.  Therefore 
she  declared  in  effect  that  Servia  must  not  reach  to  the 
sea  and  must  not  occupy  Durazzo.  Servia  insisted  upon 
getting  the  city,  and  in  November  Austria  began  to  mobil- 
ize her  troops.  Germany  declared  that  she  would  support 
her  allies  if  they  were  attacked.  Russia  began  to  mobilize 
troops  behind  the  screen  of  her  Polish  fortresses,  and 
France  announced  that  she  would  stand  by  her  ally  if 
needed.  Italy,  while  opposed  to  Servia  appearing  on  the 
Adriatic,  was  as  much  opposed  to  further  extension  of 
Austrian  power  down  that  sea  coast.  In  Great  Britain 
public  opinion,  so  far  as  it  was  interested,  was  in  favor  of 
letting  the  small  Balkan  states  keep  the  conquests  they  had 
won  from  the  Turk,  even  though  at  the  beginning  the 
Great  Powers  had  announced  that  these  states  would  not 
be  allowed  to  make  conquests. 

Servia  yielded  and  withdrew  her  troops;  and,  in  the 
treaty  of  peace  which  followed,  an  independent  Albania 
was  constituted,  as  Austria  wished.     The  Montenegrins, 


510 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Servia  and 
Montenegro 
yield  to 
Austria- 
Hungary, 
1912-13 


The  new 
situation    in 
the  Balkans, 
1913 


however,  continued  to  besiege  Scutari,  in  northern  Al- 
bania, and  after  a  long  investment,  captured  the  fortress. 
Before  the  fall  of  the  city  the  powers  had  notified  Monte- 
negro that  Scutari  was  to  belong  to  Albania,  and  then  they 
blockaded  the  one  little  harbor  which  Montenegro  pos- 
sessed. When  Scutari  fell,  Austria-Hungary  demanded 
that  it  be  given  up  at  once,  and  went  forward  with  the 
mobilization  of  troops.  Again  Russia  made  ready  to 
support  her  Slavic  kinsmen,  but  the  crisis  was*  passed  when 
Montenegro  yielded  to  the  pressure  of  the  powers  and 
abandoned  the  city  just  taken  at  such  cost. 

The  result  of  the  Second  Balkan  War,  which  soon  fol- 
lowed, brought  profound  alteration  in  the  balance  of  power 
and  poHtics  in  Europe.     Early  in  1912,  after  long  struggle 
between  the  Teutonic  Powers  and  Russia  for  predominat- 
ing imfluence  in  the  Balkans,  the  result  then  was  that 
Servia,  small  and  unimportant,  along  wh:h  Montenegro, 
of  little  consequence,  were  friendly  to  Russia  and  to  some 
extent  dependent  on  her,  while  Greece,  also  unimportant, 
was  bound  by  many  ties  to  France.     On  the  other  hand, 
Rumania,  the  strongest  and  most  pr6gressive  of  the  Balkan 
states,  was  bound  by  an  agreement  with  the  Central  Powers 
and  was  an  appendage  of  the  Triple  Alliance;  Bulgaria, 
strong  and  successful,  was  very  friendly  to  the  Dual 
Monarchy;  and  Turkey,  still  believed  to  be  more  power- 
ful than  any  of  her  neighbors,  was  bound  by  closest  ties 
to  the  German  Empire.     But  in  1913,  after  the  Second 
Balkan  War,  not  only  was  the  strength  of  Turkey  as  i 
European  power  so  weakened  that  she  counted  for  littl 
more  than  possessor  of  the  incomparable  site  of  Constan 
tinople  and  territories  in  Asia,  but  Servia,  the  bitter  enems 
of  Austria,  had  come  out  of  both  wars  with  increased  powe 
and  territory  and  greatly  increased  prestige,  and  Rumania 
former  friend  of  the  Central  Powers,  was  no  longer  su 
closely  bound  to  them,  and  had  acted  contrary  to  theii 
wishes  against  their  friend. 


ALLIANCE  AND  ENTENTES       511 


Altogether,  the  position  of  Germany  and  Austria- 
Hungary  was  much  less  good  with  respect  to  the  Balkans 
than  before.  Austria  greatly  desired  to  settle  at  once  her 
account  with  Servia,  arid  reduce  her  permanently  to  a  posi- 
tion in  which  she  could  never  again  be  a  source  of  appre- 
hension. It  was  learned  afterward  that  in  August  1913 
Austria-Hungary  tried  to  get  her  partners  in  the  Triple 
Alliance  to  join  her  in  proceeding  against  Servia.  But  the 
Italian  government  refused  to  give  sanction,  and  the  mat- 
ter was  dropped  until  the  next  year.  What  action  Ger- 
many then  took  is  not  certain,  though  most  probably  she 
also  dissuaded  her  ally.  During  the  conference  of  the 
powers  at  London,  Germany  acted  along  with  Great  Bri- 
tain in  trying  to  settle  peaceably  the  matters  at  issue. 

Had  she  joined  Great  Britain  in  the  next  year  as  cor- 
dially, it  is  probable  that  the  Great  War  would  have  been 
avoided.  But  whereas  in  1914  she  was  ready  for  the  great 
decision,  it  is  known  that  in  1913  she  did  not  consider  her 
preparations  complete.  The  changes  in  the  Balkans 
seemed  to  diminish  her  military  superiority,  and  in  1913 
many  Germans  declared  that  the  country  could  be  safe 
from  the  growing  menace  of  Russia  and  Pan-Slavism  only 
if  great  sacrifices  were  made  and  the  army  largely  in- 
creased. Accordingly,  huge  and  extraordinary  sums  of 
money  were  voted  for  greater  armaments,  and  the  army 
was  increased  to  870,000  men.  Immediately  thereupon 
the  French,  feeling  the  greater  danger  from  Germany, 
enlarged  their  army  also.  They  could  not  with  stationary 
population  simply  expand  their  standing  army  as  the 
Germans  did,  but  by  keeping  the  troops  with  the  colors 
for  three  years  instead  of  two  they  made  a  substantial 
increase.  It  was  recognized  that  this  was  literally  the 
last  effort  of  France  in  the  race. 

Pacifists  and  well-meaning  people  now  began  to  believe 
that  a  great  war  never  would  come.  But  it  had  almost 
come  in  1911,  and  as  nearly  in  1913.     Both  times  the 


German 
prepara- 
tions not 
complete 


51«  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

great  struggle  was  avoided,  it  would  seem,  partly  because 
Germany  was  not  yet  ready.  In  another  year  now,  she 
was  to  be  prepared ;  then  another  crisis  would  come,  again 
about  Servia  and  the  Balkans;  and  that  time  the  utmost 
efforts  of  those  who  wanted  peace  would  not  be  sufficient 
to  keep  it. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  Triple  Entente:  R.  B.  Mowat,  Select  Treaties  and  Docu- 
ments (ed.  1916),  contains  the  texts  of  the  Entente  Cordialcy 
public  and  secret  parts,  and  of  the  Anglo-Russian  Agreement; 
Sir  Thomas  Barclay,  Thirty  Years*  Anglo-French  Reminiscences 
(1914);  L.  J.  Jaray,  La  Politique  Franco-Anglaise  et  V Arbitrage 
Internationale  (1904);  E.  Lemonon,  Z'^wrope  et  la  Politique 
Britannique,  1882-1910  (1910);  R.  Millet,  Notre  Politique  Ex- 
Urieure  de  1898-1905  (1905),  hostile  to  Delcasse;  Gilbert  Murray 
The  Foreign  Policy  of  Sir  Edward  Grey  (1915),  defends;  G.  H. 
Perris,  Our  Foreign  Policy  and  Sir  Edward  Grey's  Failure  (1912), 
opposed  to  the  ententes;  A.  Tardieu,  Questions  Diplomatiques  de 
V Annie  1904  (1905). 

Relations  with  Russia:  The  Willy-Nicky  Correspondence, 
edited  by  Herman  Bernstein  (1918),  to  be  supplemented  by 
S.  B.  Fay,  "The  Kaiser's  Secret  Negotiations  with  the  Czar, 
1904-5,"  American  Historical  Review,  October  1918. 

The  conflict  over  Morocco:  P.  Albin,  Le  ''Coup**  d'Agadir 
(1912);  G.  Diercks,  Die  Marokkofrage  und  die  Konferenz  von 
Algeciras  (1906) ;  L.  Maurice,  La  Politique  Marocaine  de  VAlle- 
magne  (1916);  A.  Tardieu,  La  Conference  d* Algeciras  (ed.  1917), 
best  on  subject,  Le  Mystere  d*Agadir  (1912),  best  account  of; 
A.  Wirth,  Die  ErUscheidung  uber  Marokko  (1911). 


CHAPTER    X 
THE     CAUSES     OF    THE     GREAT     WAR 

Gelegentlich  der  Ubergabe  der  vorstehenden  Note  woUen  Euer 
Hochwohlgeboren  miindlich  hinzuf iigen,  dass  Sie  beauftragt  seien 
— falls  Ihnen  nicht  inzwischen  eine  vorbehaltlose  zustimmende 
Antwort  der  Konigliehen  Regierung  zugekommen  sein  soUte — ^nach 
Ablauf  der  in  der  Note  vorgesehenen,  vom  Tage  und  von  der  Stun- 
de  Ihrer  Mitteilung  an  zu  rechnenden  48  stiindigen  Frist,  mit  dem 
Personale  der  k.  u.  k.  Gesandschaft  Belgrad  zu  verlassen. 
Instruction  of  Count  Berchtold  to  Baron  von  Giesl,  about  pre- 
senting the  Austrian  Note  at  Belgrade,  July  22,  1914. 

Such  had  been  the  development  of  the  politics  of 
Europe  that  now  there  were  not  wanting  those  who  each 
year  predicted  a  great  war  inevitable  in  the  future.  Yet 
this  seemed  such  a  travesty  upon  civilization  and  the  pro- 
gress of  mankind,  that  many  contended  in  these  later 
years  that  no  great  war  could  again  take  place;  that  war 
never  paid ;  that  the  dreadful  losses  certain  to  come  would 
deter  the  great  nations  from  fighting;  that  arbitration 
would  be  used  more  and  more  in  the  future,  and  the 
Hague  Tribunal  be  able  peaceably  to  settle  disputes; 
that  the  whole  tendency  of  politics  recently  had  been  to 
make  governments  more  and  more  democratic,  and  that 
the  mass  of  the  people,  now  that  they  had  power  in  govern- 
ing themselves,  would  not  pernait  any  more  wars  or  give 
them  support;  that  commerce  and  finance  now  bound  the 
nations  closely  together^  and  that  economic  forces  were 
bringing  war  to  an  end.  ,  There  was  much  truth  in  all  of 
these  contentions,  and  perhaps  had  mankind  been  more 
fortunate  and  wiser,  no  great  war  need  have  come;  but  as 

513 


514 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


one  looks  back  and  considers  things  as  they  were,  not  as 
men  hoped  they  were,  it  is  evident  that  certain  great 
causes  were  tending  almost  irresistibly  to  the  awful  catas- 
trophe that  came. 

By  1914  the  great  nations  of  Europe  were  divided  into 
two  strong  hostile  combinations,  the  Triple  Alliance  and 
the  Triple  Entente,  armed  to  the  teeth  and  constantly 
watching  one  another.  In  the  nineteenth  century  there  had 
been  in  Europe  a  development  of  armies  and  military  pre- 
parations never  seen  before  in  the  world.  In  former  times 
there  had  been  great  military  states,  Assyria,  Sparta, 
Rome,  overawing  all  their  neighbors;  but  now  most 
men  in  the  principal  states  of  Europe  had  been  trained 
as  soldiers  and  were  ready  for  the  call.  The  "standing 
army"  of  Germany  numbered  870,000,  while  4,000,000 
more  trained  soldiers  could,  if  necessary,  be  called;  in 
France  670,000  were  in  the  camps,  and  it  was  thought  that 
3,000,000  could  follow.  By  this  time  the  soldiers  of  the 
Continental  armies  numbered  millions,  with  millions  more 
in  reserve.  There  had  never  been  anything  like  it  before, 
and  it  was  believed  that  another  war  would  either  be 
decided  immediately  in  favor  of  that  nation  which  could 
suddenly  bring  greatest  forces  to  bear,  or  else  all  the  con- 
testants would  soon  be  exhausted,  because  of  the  stupen- 
dous cost. 

Nor  was  this  all.  With  these  vast  military  establish- 
ments went  the  preparation  of  war-supplies  in  incredible 
quantities.  Never  before  in  the  history  of  the  world  had 
there  been  so  enormous  an  accumulation  of  rifles,  cannon, 
machine  guns,  explosives,  and  death-dealing  instruments 
of  all  kinds.  The  best  brains  and  the  greatest  ingenuity 
in  some  of  these  countries  went  into  the  devising  of  more 
dreadful  instruments  of  destruction.  There  were  feverish 
activity  and  the  most  reckless  Expenditure  to  keep  up  in 
the  race.  Powerful  weapons  soon  became  obsolete  and 
were  replaced  with  others  more  terrible.     To  lag  in  the 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR     515 

race  might  some  time  mean  destruction  by  a  more  active 
rival.  Elaborate  arrangements  were  prepared  for  sudden 
attack,  and  complete  plans  of  campaign.  Spies  were  sent 
out  in  time  of  peace,  to  collect  information  or  disarrange 
plans.  Railway  systems  were  constructed  for  quickly 
moving  troops,  and  "strategic  railways"  appeared,  as 
along  the  Belgian  frontier  of  Germany,  where  there  were 
few  passengers  and  little  freight  to  be  moved.  And  still 
more  terrible,  but  as  a  natural  consequence,  powerful 
men  who  gave  their  careers  to  military  service,  thought 
about  military  effectiveness  so  much  and  tried  so  hard  to 
perfect  their  armies,  that  they  came  to  think  of  war  as  a 
good  thing,  and  to  hope  that  there  might  some  day  be  a 
chance  to  use  the  weapons  they  so  diligently  prepared. 
In  all  of  these  things  Germany  took  the  lead  and  kept  far 
ahead.  When  statesmen  of  other  countries  tried  to  bring 
about  reduction  of  armament,  and  arrange  plans  for  set- 
tling national  disputes  by  peaceable  means,  Germany 
always  opposed  or  refused. 

Because  of  mere  geographical  situation  and  the  arrange- 
ment of  outlets  and  frontiers  some  of  the  nations  of  Europe 
were  at  a  disadvantage  as  compared  with  rivals,  so  that 
they  earnestly  desired  to  get  things  which  they  lacked, 
which  could  only  be  obtained  by  taking  them  away  from 
others.  Some  countries  were  closed  in  from  the  sea  by 
others,  who  could,  whenever  they  wished,  deny  them 
outlet  and  strangle  their  economic  life.  Some  nations  had 
vast  expanse  of  territory  in  which  to  increase  their  popula- 
tion and  make  themselves  greater  in  the  future;  others  had 
restricted  areas  and  far  less  chance  for  growth. 

Russia  had  immense  territory  wanting  good  outlet.  To 
the  north  she  had  ports  in  the  Arctic  district,  remote  and 
closed  by  ice  during  much  of  the  year.  Far  to  the  east 
she  had  a  good  outlet  at  Vladivostok,  which  was  likewise 
closed  during  winter,  and  at  the  mercy  of  Japan.  In  the 
west  she  had  ports  on  the  Baltic  Sea,  but  they  were  not 


516 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

Adriatic,  the 
Baltic,  the 
Mediterra- 
nean 


only  used  with  difficulty  during  some  months  in  the  winter, 
but  the  German  Empire  could  close  all  Baltic  trade  if  ever 
it  wished.  In  the  south  there  were  excellent  ports  on 
the  Black  Sea,  and  to  this  sea  came  most  of  Russia's  com- 
merce, but  the  only  exit  from  the  Black  Sea  was  through 
the  Bosporus  and  the  Dardanelles,  narrow  straits  con- 
trolled absolutely  by  the  Turks  at  Constantinople.  It  had 
been  the  age-long  aspiration  of  Russians  to  get  a  good 
warm-water  outlet,  and  it  had  long  been  their  passionate 
desire  to  win  Constantinople.  But  if  Russia  succeeded 
in  this,  then  some  of  the  greatest  ambitions  of  Germany 
might  come  to  nothing,  and  Austria-Hungary  would  be 
largely  at  Russia's  mercy.  Not  only  did  Austria-Hungary 
desire  to  expand  southward  through  the  Balkans,  but  her 
great  river,  the  Danube,  emptied  into  the  Black  Sea,  and 
much  of  her  commerce  went  out  past  Constantinople.  That 
is  to  say,  if  Russia  succeeded  in  her  ambition,  then  Austria- 
Hungary  could  be  largely  closed  in  and  at  Russia's  mercy, 
while  if  Austria  got  what  she  desired,  then  Russia  would 
be  largely  at  her  mercy  in  like  manner. 

There  were  many  circumstances  similar.  Austria's 
other  outlet  was  into  the  Adriatic,  at  Trieste  and  Fiume, 
but  the  end  of  the  Adriatic  was  getting  entirely  into  Italy's 
control.  Germany,  who  could  close  in  Russia  on  the 
Baltic,  saw  her  great  trade  routes  in  the  North  Sea  and 
through  the  English  Channel  at  the  mercy  of  Great  Britain, 
who  could  shut  them  off  if  she  wished.  And  all  the  na- 
tions with  ports  on  the  Mediterranean,  the  most  important 
sea  and  the  greatest  water  short-line  in  the  world,  found 
the  Mediterranean  held  at  both  ends,  at  Suez  and  Gibral- 
tar, by  Great  Britain.  It  was  not  that  these  outlets  were 
closed  and  nations  strangled  or  made  economically  de- 
pendent, but  the  fact  that  in  some  great  struggle  they 
could  be.  Statesmen  thought  of  the  future,  and  were  filled 
with  distrust.  In  time  of  peace  all  the  seas  controlled  by 
Britain  were  used  by  all  the  nations  as  much  as  they 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR  517 


I 


wished,  but  during  the  Great  War  Britain's  command 
of  the  sea  at  last  brought  Germany  to  her  knees,  just  as 
already  Russia  had  been  destroyed  largely  because  she  had 
from  the  first  been  closed  in  by  the  German  Empire  and 
Turkey.  Indeed,  in  1911-12,  during  the  Turco-Italian 
War,  in  which  Russia  had  no  part,  Russia's  grain  fleet  was 
completely  stopped  through  the  closing  of  the  straits  by 
Turkey. 

Just  as  great  to  some  seemed  the  disadvantage  of 
not  having  room  for  expansion.  The  English-speaking 
peoples,  the  Russians,  China  and  Japan,  perhaps  some  of 
the  South  American  states,  had  room  in  which  to  grow  and 
increase  their  numbers.  Even  France,  whose  population 
was  stationary,  had  a  large  colonial  empire.  But  Ger- 
many's territory  was  small,  and  she  had  no  good  colonies 
in  which  might  grow  up  a  greater  Germany  over  the  seas. 
Germany's  population  was  increasing,  and  some  looked 
forward  to  the  time  when  there  would  be  200,000,000 
Germans  in  the  empire,  and  then  France  would  be  at 
hopeless  disadvantage.  But  when  that  time  came,  it 
seemed  probable  that  the  population  of  Russia  might  be 
1,000,000,000;  and  then  what  chance  would  Germany  have 
against  her.^  Nor  could  this  disparity  be  avoided,  for 
Russia  had  immense  territories  only  thinly  peopled,  able 
to  support  many  more,  while  beyond  a  certain  number 
it  seemed  impossible  that  Germany  could  support  more 
in  the  limited  area  she  possessed.  Later  on,  accordingly, 
the  destiny  of  the  world  would  be  in  the  hands  of  great 
contestants  like  Russia,  the  British  Empire,  perhaps  the 
United  States,  with  Germany  relatively  a  minor  power 
like  France — unless  before  this  evil  day  came,  Germany 
struck  and  took  from  others  the  territory  which  they  had 
and  which  she  needed  so  badly. 

Connected  with  this  were  differences  in  birth  rate  and 
increase  in  population.  In  some  countries  the  number  of 
people  was  increasing  more  rapidly  than  in  others,  and. 


Room  for 
growth  of 
population 


518  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

other  things  being  equal,  superior  numbers  would  be  sure 
to  give  greater  military  strength  and  power.  At  the  be- 
ginning of  the  nineteenth  century  the  population  of  France 
was  27,000,000;  in  1914  it  was  a  little  less  than  40,000,000. 
In  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  there  were  in 
the  countries  which  afterward  made  up  the  German 
Empire,  24,000,000  people,  but  when  the  Great  War  began 
the  population  was  estimated  at  about  68,000,000.  Dur- 
ing this  same  period  the  population  of  Great  Britain  had 
grown  from  10,500,000  to  over  40,000,000,  though  during 
the  same  time  Ireland  had  declined  from  8,000,000  to 
4,500,000.  In  France  the  standard  of  living  was  high, 
the  birth  rate  was  low.  On  the  other  hand,  in  Italy  where 
the  standard  of  living  was  low,  the  population  increased  so 
rapidly  that  numerous  emigrants  had  to  go  forth  from  a 
country  which  could  not  support  them;  and  in  Russia, 
despite  an  appalling  infant  mortality,  it  increased  more 
rapidly  still.  In  Germany,  where  the  standard  was  high, 
it  also  increased  rapidly,  so  that  a  large  part  of  the  popula- 
tion could  only  be  supported  by  making  goods  to  be  ex- 
changed with  other  nations  for  food.  It  was  Germany's 
dearest  desire  to  have  more  good  territory  in  which  to 
expand  and  increase  her  numbers,  while  the  rapid  increase 
which  she  had  constantly  made  her  more  powerful,  and 
more  able  to  be  arrogant  and  threatening  to  her  neighbors. 
There  were  particular  things  which  seemed  to  bode  ill 
for  the  future,  such  as  the  feeling  in  France  that  gross  in- 
justice had  been  done  by  Germany  in  taking  Alsace- 
Lorraine,  though  the  desire  of  the  French  people  for  a  war 
of  revenge  had  largely  passed  away,  and  by  1914  it  was 
very  probable  that  France  would  never  go  to  war  solely  to 
win  the  "lost  provinces"  back.  Italy  wished  much  for 
the  lands  in  which  Italians  lived,  which  had  not  been  given 
to  her  at  the  time  when  her  unity  was  achieved,  but  it  was 
not  probable  that  she  would  go  to  war  to  get  them,  or  be 
able  to  get  them  if  she  did.     Far  more  important  were  the 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR  519 


rivalry  between  Teuton  and  Slav  in  eastern  Europe,  and 
the  relations  between  Germany  and  England  in  the  west. 
The  relations  between  Germany  and  England  in  earlier 
times  had  generally  been  good.  But  a  great  change  came 
at  the  end  of  the  century,  when  Germany,  having  built  up 
the  greatest  military  power  in  the  world,  seemed  to  desire 
naval  supremacy  also.  In  1898  and  in  1900  were  passed 
two  of  the  most  important  naval  measures  ever  sanctioned 
in  any  country.  At  once  English  leaders  were  alarmed, 
and  in  the  years  that  followed  the  attention  of  people  in 
Great  Britain  was  given  more  and  more  to  the  growth  and 
ambitions  of  Germany.  Additional  warships  were  built, 
and  then,  when  for  a  while  it  seemed  that  Germany  might 
still  get  ahead,  vast  appropriations  were  made  and  naval 
construction  carried  on  with  feverish  haste.  Many  people 
believed  that  there  was  no  danger,  but  many  more  thought 
that  the  British  Empire  was  now  threatened  by  the  great- 
est danger  that  had  ever  confronted  it.  There  were  not 
Wanting  some  who  feared  that  the  Germans  might  strike 
without  any  declaration  of  war,  and  evading  the  British 
fleet  some  misty  night,  suddenly  throw  into  England  a 
force  which  would  destroy  Great  Britain  without  hope  of 
redemption.  It  was  necessary,  then,  to  be  perpetually  on 
guard,  to  maintain  overwhelming  sea  power,  and  perhaps 
raise  a  great  army  for  defence.  Some  attempts  were  made 
to  end  this  rivalry  and  suspicion,  but  though  a  temporary 
arrangement  was  arrived  at,  no  real  agreement  could  be 
reached.  The  British  people  desired  to  avoid  a  conflict, 
and  the  British  government  made  a  sincere  effort  to  remove 
such  differences  as  existed  between  the  two  nations,  and 
in  doing  this  made  large  and  generous  concessions,  espe- 
cially with  respect  to  the  Bagdad  Railway  scheme,  but  it 
cannot  be  known  what  good  results  might  have  come  of 
this,  since  the  agreement  was  reached  only  a  little  before 
the  Great  War  broke  out.  Meanwhile  the  statesmen  of 
Britain  were  constantly  watching  Germany's  every  move. 


Germany 
and  Great 
Britain 


520 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Teuton  and 
Slav 


The  South 
Slavs  and 
Russia 


and  it  had  become  the  cornerstone  of  her  foreign  policy 
that  under  no  circumstances  must  she  ever  allow  France, 
her  best  friend,  to  be  crushed  by  German  armies. 

Less  acute  and  less  evident,  perhaps,  was  another  and 
greater  rivalry,  between  the  Teutonic  peoples,  especially 
the  Germans  in  central  Europe,  and  the  Slavic  peoples, 
especially  Russia  in  the  east — a  contest  which  principally 
concerned  Constantinople  and  the  Balkans.  For  ages  this 
contest  had  lasted.  Once  the  Slavs  had  pushed  the  Teu- 
tons almost  to  the  Elbe  and  the  Rhine.  Then  the  tide 
turned,  and  the  history  of  the  Middle  Ages  in  central 
Europe  is  to  a  considerable  extent  the  story  of  the  recon- 
quest  of  lands  by  the  Germans  from  the  Slavs.  In  this 
way  was  eastern  Prussia  built  up;  in  this  way  the  power  of 
Austria  also  was  extended,  and  just  before  the  war  there 
continued  to  be  more  Slavs  in  Austria  than  there  were 
Germans  and  more  Slavs  in  Hungary  than  Magyars. 
Poland  had  once  been  the  great  Slavic  chanipion,  but  she 
had  disappeared,  and  her  place  of  leadership  had  been 
taken^  by-^the  enormous  Empire  of  Russia.  The  rivalry 
now  was  concerned  largely  with  the  mastery  of  the  Balkan 
peninsula. 

In  the  days^when  the  Eastern  Roman  Empire  was  de- 
caying the  Balkan  Peninsula  had  been  occupied  largely  by 
South  Slavic  p^ples.  In  course  of  time  they  were  over- 
whelmed and  submerged  by  the  Turks.  In  the  nine- 
teenth century  they  and  the  Greeks  got  their  freedom  once 
more.  To  this  freedom  they  had  all  been  helped  by  Russia 
to  whom  they  looked  as  their  protector  and  the  great 
brother  of  their  race.  Russia  desired  to  protect  them  or 
perhaps  some  day  incorporate  them  in  a  great  Pan-Russian 
domain,  and  she  held  these  feelings  not  only  because  she 
was  ambitious  but  because  she  felt  the  ties  of  religion  and 
race;  they  were  all  of  them  Slavic  in  blood  and  they  held 
the  Greek  Catholic  faith.  Also  Russia  greatly  desired  to 
have  Constantinople  and  an  outlet  on  the  Mediterranean. 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR  521 


This  would  never  be  possible,  perhaps,  unless  she  con- 
trolled the  Balkans. 

But  these  ambitions  of  Russia  conflicted  directly  with 
what  had  come  to  be  the  first  ambition  of  the  Germanic 
Powers,  and  their  best  chance  for  founding  a  greater  em- 
pire. Germany  began  too  late  to  try  to  build  up  a  domin- 
ion in  colonies  or  distant  lands.  There  was  no  territory 
into  which  she  could  expand  in  Europe  without  taking  it 
away  from  some  neighbor  as  the  result  of  a  war;  and  by  the 
time  she  attempted  to  get  colonies,  England  and  France 
had  taken  almost  all  of  the  best  that  were  to  be  had. 
There  did,  indeed,  seem  to  be  some  possibility  of  expansion 
in  South  America  and  in  the  Far  East,  but  for  the  present 
the  Monroe  Doctrine  debarred  her  from  taking  Latin 
American  countries,  and  after  the  Russo-Japanese  War 
European  acquisitions  in  China  came  to  an  end,  since  they 
were  now  opposed  by  Japan.  It  might  be  that  some  day 
Germany  could  take  away  the  colonial  dominion  of  France 
or  even  the  far-flung  possessions  of  the  British  Empire; 
but  if  these  things  came  they  must  be  the  result  of  a  vic- 
torious war  won  by  greater  Germany  in  the  future.  One 
inviting  field  remained,  and  that  was  in  the  domain  of 
Turkey,  mostly  in  Asia  Minor,  which  was  thinly  peopled 
and  backward  now  imder  the  rule  of  the  Turk,  but  which 
had  once  been  a  seat  of  civilization,  populous,  important 
and  wealthy.     Under  German  rule  it  might  be  so  again. 

Accordingly,  the  German  government  had  cultivated 
good  relations  with  the  Turks,  and  had  recently  become  so 
influential  in  the  government  of  that  country  that  Turkey 
was  getting  to  be  an  appendage  of  the  German  alliance. 
But  in  order  that  the  German  Empire  might  control  the 
Turkish  dominions  it  seemed  necessary  that  Austria- 
Hungary  and  Germany  together  should  control  the  Balkan 
Peninsula  which  lay  in  between.  This  suited  very  well  the 
schemes  of  the  Dual  Monarchy  which  desired  to  expand 
to  the  south,     Gradually  the  plan  took  shape.     The  two 


Germany, 
the  Balkans, 
Asiatic 
Turkey 


MitteU 
Europa 
and  the 
Bagdad 
Railway 


522  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

principal  members  of  the  Triple  Alliance  were  to  dominate 
the  Balkans  and  thence  get  control  of  the  Turkish  lands 
and  so  build  up  across  "Middle  Europe"  a  great  empire 
which  would  extend  from  the  North  Sea  to  the  Persian 
Gulf.  To  hold  it  together,  to  carry  on  a  great  trade  with 
profit,  to  defend  it  in  time  of  war,  a  great  railroad  must 
bind  all  parts  together.  Already  most  of  such  a  railroad 
existed.  From  the  ports  of  the  North  Sea  and  the  Baltic, 
lines  ran  to  Berlin,  then  to  Vienna  and  Buda-Pest,  thence 
to  Belgrade,  and  on  to  Constantinople.  The  Germans 
were  extending  this  line  of  communication  by  building  the 
"Bagdad  Railway,"  which  starting  on  the  shore  of  the 
Bosporus  opposite  Constantinople  would  run  across  Asia 
Minor  and  across  Mesopotamia  to  the  city  of  Bagdad,  so 
famed  in  the  Arabian  Nights,  and  thence  on  to  the  Persian 
Gulf,  while  a  branch  would  go  down  along  the  Mediter- 
ranean past  Egypt  to  the  Arabian  cities  of  Mohammed. 
Rivalry  in  Realization  of  this  scheme  of  "Middle  Europe"  would 

^  make  it  impossible  to  fulfil  the  ambitions  of  the  Slavs; 
it  was  therefore  strongly  opposed  by  Russia.  The  field 
in  which  these  conflicting  ambitions  most  clashed  was  the 
Balkan  Peninsula,  the  mastery  of  which  was  indispensable 
to  success  for  either  side.  Hence  the  Balkans  became  the 
principal  danger-spot  of  Europe.  Twice  did  a  great  war 
almost  break  out  because  of  disputes  over  this  district. 
In  1908  Austria-Hungary  annexed  Bosnia  and  Herzego- 
\  vina.  Russia  strongly  objected,  but  yielded,  suffering 
thus  a  diplomatic  defeat.  In  1912-13  another  crisis  devel- 
oped when  the  small  Balkan  nations  overthrew  Turkey, 
took  from  her  almost  all  of  her  territory  in  Europe,  and 
then  fought  among  themselves  in  dividing  it  up.  On  this 
occasion  the  Germans,  and  especially  the  Austrians,  suf- 
fered loss,  since  the  power  of  Turkey  seemed  to  be  de- 
stroyed, and  Servia,  Austria's  bitterest  foe,  extended  her 
territory  and  became  more  ambitious.  It  seemed  now 
that  Russia  and  the  Triple  Entente  had  the  greater  in- 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR  523 


fluence  in  the  Balkans.  The  subject  Slavic  peoples  in 
the  Dual  Monarchy  became  restless,  and  hoped  that  some 
day  they  could  be  independent  or  else  join  the  Servian 
kingdom.  Worst  of  all,  if  a  Hostile  Servia  remained  in- 
dependent, there  might  be  no  Middle  Europe  and  no 
through  railroad  communication  from  Hamburg  to  Bag- 
dad, since  it  was  desirable  that  this  railroad  should  run 
across  Servia  up  the  valley  of  the  Morava  river.  TJ^is  was 
indeed,  thg  cause  that  led  directly  to  the  war.  The 
Teutonic  powers  were  determmed  that  an  independent 
Servia  should  not  stand  in  their  way.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  was  nearly  certain  that  if  Russia  allowed  Servia  to  be 
crushed,  then  her  gr,eat  hopes  must  come  to  an  end. 
Hence  there  were  endless  plots  and  constant  watching  to 
see  that  neither  side  gained  any  advantage. 

The  last  and  the  greatest  of  the  causes  of  the  war  was 
Germany  herself.  The  character,  the  ambitions,  the  ideals 
of  her  rulers  and  her  people  made  a  great  war  probable 
whatever  other  causes  existed. .  No  people  had  developed 
so  greatly  in  so  short  a  time.  They  had  succeeded  because 
of  high  intelligence,  industry,  and  their  excellent  organiza- 
tion. But  they  had  also  succeeded  by  force  and  by  fraud 
and  by  might.  And  as  the  years,  went  on  their  character 
underwent  curious  and  terrible  change.  Spoiled  by  suc- 
cess, they  became  selfish,  cynical,  hard,  worshipping  ma- 
terialism, believing  themselves  superior  and  high  above 
others. 

Many  peoples  have  thought  themselves  the  greatest  and 
the  best  in  the  world — the  Greeks,  and  the  Romans  once, 
the  British,  the  French,  the  Russians,  the  Japanese,  and 
the  people  of  the  United  States.  But  in  modern  times 
there  has  been  no  such  extreme  belief  as  that  which  was 
cherished  by  the  Germans.  "The  Teutons  are  the  aris- 
tocracy of  humanity,"  said  a  well-known  writer.  "The 
Teutonic  race  is  called  to  circle  the  earth  with  its  rule,  to 
exploit  the  treasures  of  nature  and  of  human  labor,  and  to 


Servia 


The 
Germans 


Belief  in 

racial 

superiority 


524 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Glorification 
of  war 


Arrogance 
and 

boundless 
ambition 


make  the  passive  races  servient  elements  in  its  cultural  de- 
velopment." He  declared  that  the  greatlwork  of  the  world 
had  been  done  by  men  of  Teutonic  race,  that  Leonardo  da 
Vinci,  Galileo,  and  Voltaire  were  actually  of  Teutonic 
strain,  and  that  Alexander  the  Great  and  Julius  Caesar 
were  of  the  Teutonic  type.  "Whoever  has  the  character- 
istics of  the  Teutonic  race  is  superior."  Such  teachings 
were  spread  broadcast  through  the  German  Empire  in 
popular  form,  and  after  a  while  generally  believed  in. 

Above  all  was  it  believed  that  the  German  people  were 
superior  in  war.  They  had  humbled  all  with  whom  they 
had  fought.  There  were  still  other  and  greater  foes,  but 
the  reckoning  would  come  with  them  also.  An  accounting 
would  come  with  Russia,  and  many  people  looked  eagerly 
forward  to  "the  day"  when  the  British  Empire  was  to  be 
laid  low  by  German  valor.  Long-continued  mihtarism 
had  accustomed  the  German  people  to  martial  ideas;  great 
success  in  their  recent  wars,  confident  belief  in  their  su- 
periority and  future  success,  caused  many  to  believe  that 
war  was  a  good  thing  in  itself.  "Perpetual  peace  is  a 
dream,"  wrote  Field-Marshal  von  Moltke  in  1880,  "war  is 
part  of  the  eternal  order  instituted  by  God."  Others 
declared  that  war  was  a  part  of  the  struggle  for  survival 
of  the  fittest,  which,  they  said,  was  everywhere  and  always 
going  on  in  the  evolution  of  things.  Through  conflict  the 
superior  Germans  would  triumph  over  other  nations.  And 
as  a  result  of  the  victories  to  come  Germany  would  take 
away  from  the  vanc^ished  their  possessions,  which  it  was 
more  fitting  that  she  ^ould  have.  It  would  be  better 
for  the  world  if  Germans  possessed  France  and  parts  of 
Russia  and  great  domains  everywhere,  since  then  the  great- 
est and  the  best  of  peoples  would  have  chance  for  develop- 
ment larger  and  freer. 

As  Germany  became  greater  and  stronger  each  year,  as 
behef  in  glorious  destiny  was  preached  and  taught  in  the 
schools  and  everywhere  circulated  in  cheap  and  popular 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR     5^5 


writings,  as  Germans  believed  more  in  the  goodness  of  war 
and  in  their  invincible  army  and  navy,  their  ambition  and 
their  arrogance  were  boundless.  Not  only  military  men 
but  many  others  dreamed  fondly  of  grand  victories  to  come 
and  books  were  published  containing  maps  of  the  world 
with  the  best  parts  under  German  rule.  All  of  this  was 
well  expressed  in  the  writings  of  General  von  Bernhardi, 
especially  in  his  Germany  and  the  Next  War,  published 
in  1911.  He  maintained  that  war  was  a  thing  excellent 
in  itself.  Through  great  wars  would  Germany's  future  be 
assured.  First  "France  must  be  so  completely  crushed 
that  never  again  can  she  come  across  our  path";  then 
would  come  the  reckoning  with  England.  The  next  war 
would  be  for  Weltmacht  oder  Untergang,  world-power  or 
downfall; — and  so  in  the  end  it  was. 

Along  mth  this  materialism,  this  ambition,  this  belief 
in  the  goodness  of  war,  and  the  great  plans  that  were 
cherished,  went  gradually  a  profound  change  in  character, 
which  affected  great  numbers  with  a  veritable  madness, 
but  was  for  a  while  not  understood  by  outsiders.  Old 
maxims,  often  preached  before  and  often  abandoned  as 
people  improved,  were  revived  now  and  strengthened. 
Since  war  was  so  good,  force  was  the  deciding  factor,  and 
might  made  right.  Since  the  Germans  were  superior,  and 
their  aims  for  the  good  of  the  world,  whatever  they  did  to 
secure  their  ends  was  right;  the  end  justified  the  means. 
Since  the  Germans  were  superior,  a  particular  code  ex- 
isted for  them:  they  were  not  bound  by  ordinary  moral 
laws.  The  old  teachings  of  Christ — that  mercy  and  mild- 
ness should  be  shown,  and  that  men  should  do  unto  others 
as  they  would  have  others  do  unto  them — were  openly 
scoffed  at  by  teachers  who  proclaimed  that  Germans  were 
supermen  who  should,  by  force  or  fraud  or  any  means, 
obtain  the  mastery  of  inferior  people.  Cruelty,  terror, 
hardness  of  heart  might  always  be  employed  by  Germans 
in  a  coolly  scientific  and  deliberate  v/ay  to  get  the  success 


Old 

doctrines 
terrible 
once  more 


5^6 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Drifting 
toward  a 
great  war 


Sarajevo 
and  the 
Austrian 
note,  1914 


The  inde- 
pendence 
of  Servia 
at  stake 


which  was  theirs  by  right.  Nor  need  promises  be  kept  or 
treaties  observed,  if  such  observance  hindered  success. 

Thus,  many  factors  tended  to  bring  on  a  struggle. 
Several  times  a  great  war  nearly  came  to  pass.  By  1913 
conditions  had  become  such  that  it  would  be  very 
difficult  to  avoid  a  great  conflict  if  another  occasion  arose. 
The  Teutonic  Powers  were  now  fully  determined  to  secure 
certain  things,  especially  in  the  Balkans.  If  they  could, 
they  would  get  them  without  war,  but  they  were  ready  to 
fight  if  they  must.  By  this  time  only  a  pretext  was  needed : 
one  thing  would  do  as  well  as  another. 

The  immediate  cause  of  the  War  developed  from  a  single 
episode.  June  28,  1914  the  Archduke'  Franz  Ferdinand, 
heir  to  the  Austro-Hungarian  throne,  and  his  wife  were 
assassinated  in  Sarajevo,  the  capital  of  Bosnia.  The 
assassins  were  Bosnians,  but  the  affair  at  once  took  on  an 
ominous  aspect  when  it  was  known  that  Austria-Hungary 
considered  the  crime  to  have  been  plotted  in  Servia  with 
the  knowledge  of  the  government  at  Belgrade.  The  worst 
suspicions  were  confirmed  when,  about  a  month  later,  July 
24th,  a  note  was  addressed  to  the  Servian  government,  de- 
claring that  it  had  acted  in  hostile  way  toward  its  neigh- 
bor, that  it  was  a  source  of  danger,  and  that  evidently  the 
infamous  murder  of  the  archduke  had  resulted  largely 
therefrom.  Accordingly,  ten  demands  were  presented 
which  must  be  acceded,  to  in  full  within  forty-eight  hours. 
One  of  these  demands  was  that  Servia  remove  officials 
"whose  names  and  deeds  the  Austro-Hungarian  Govern- 
ment reserve  to  themselves  the  right  of  communicating"; 
while  another  was  that  Austro-Hungarian  representatives 
be  permitted  to  take  part  in  court  proceedings  in  Servia, 
and  in  measures  undertaken  there  against  those  engaged 
in  activities  against  the  Dual  Monarchy. 

At  once  it  was  the  opinion  of  those  who  read  the  note 
that  it  had  been  so  drafted  as  not  to  be  acceptable.  Sir 
Edward  Grey,  British  Secretary  for  Foreign  Affairs,  and 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR  527 

one  of  the  ablest  and  best  diplomats  in  Europe,  declared 
that  he  had  never  seen  so  formidable  a  document  addressed 
to  an  independent  state.  If  Servia  yielded  what  was  now 
asked  she  would  forego  her  sovereignty  and  independence, 
and  become  in  effect  a  dependency  of  the  power  to  whom 
she  yielded.  If  this  took  place,  then  Austria,  and  with 
her  the  German  Empire,  would  secure  in  the  Balkans  the 
supremacy  for  which  they  had  so  long  striven,  especially 
the  vital  advantage  of  controlling  Servia  and  a  necessary 
part  of  the  route  of  the  railway  to  Constantinople.  No 
state  can  retain  its  sovereignty  and  allow  representatives 
of  a  foreign  power  to  take  part  in  the  business  of  its  law 
courts,  and  if  any  power  promised  unconditionally  to  dis- 
miss such  officials  as  were  afterward  to  be  named,  not 
only  would  it  submit  to  a  demand  subversive  of  its  inde- 
pendence, but  it  would  be  possible  for  the  foreign  power  to 
cause  it  to  remodel  its  government  in  such  manner  as  to 
render  it  entirely  subservient. 

At  once  Servia  appealed  to  Russia  for  support.  Servians  Danger  of 
could  count  on  the  sympathy  of  Russia,  and  it  was  proba-  ^  ^!f!®^^^ 
ble  that  Russia  would  not  stand  aside  and  see  Germany 
and  Austria  obtain  immediate  preponderance  in  the  Bal- 
kans. Austria  unaided  would  probably  be  no  match  for 
Russia,  but  she  would  certainly  be,  supported  by  the  Ger- 
man Empire.  Men  believed  that  such  a  note  would  never 
have  been  dispatched  from  Vienna  without  the  knowledge 
and  approval  of" Berlin.  The  German  authorities  announced 
that  they  approved  the  contents  of  the  note,  but  declared 
that  they  had  not  known  these  contents  beforehand.  It 
is  now  known,  however,  that  on  July  5th  the  German 
government  promised  assistance  to  the  Austrian  govern- 
ment in  whatever  course  it  might  see  fit  to  take:  "Aus- 
tria must  judge  what  is  to  be  done  to  clear  up  her  relation 
to  Servia;  whatever  Austria's  decision  may  turn  out  to  be, 
Austria  can  count  with  certainty  upon  it,  that  Germany 
will  stand  behind  her  as  an  ally  and  friend."    But  bad  as  it 


528 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Austria 
makes  war 
on  Servia 


Austria, 
Germany, 
and  Russia 


would  be  if  Russia  came  to  the  help  of  Servia,  and  Germany 
to  the  support  of  Austria-Hungary  the  mischief  would  not 
stop  there.  France  was  bound  to  support  Russia  by  the 
terms  of  the  military  convention,  and  it  was  her  primary 
interest  not  to  abandon  Russia,  unless  Russia  was  making 
wicked  and  wanton  aggression.  And  if  France  were  drawn 
in,  it  was  most  probable  that  before  long  England  would 
come  to  her  support.  Then  a  great  European  war  would 
have  begun,  and  it  was  impossible  to  tell  how  far  it  might 
afterward  extend.  Accordingly,  those  statesmen  who 
desired  to  avert  such  catastrophe  bent  all  their  efforts  to 
quenching  the  fire  which  had  started. 

In  the  terrible  Twelve  Days,  July  24th  to  August  4th, 
many  efforts  were  made  to  settle  the  affair  and  keep  peace. 
The  British  and  French  ministers  in  Belgrade  urged  Ser- 
via to  give  a  satisfactory  reply.  The  Servian  government 
humbled  itself  and  accepted  most  of  the  demands,  not  com- 
pletely yielding  to  those  which  threatened  its  independence 
though  offering  to  refer  the  decision  about  them  to  the 
Hague  Tribunal.  Austria  refused  to  consider  the  reply, 
and  declared  war  on  Servia,  July  28th.  At  once  an  invasion 
began.  The  day  before  the  Tsar  had  declared  "Russia 
will  in  no  case  disinterest  herself  in  the  fate  of  Servia." 

The  other  great  powers  now  bent  themselves  to  keeping 
the  peace  between  Austria  and  Russia.  Great  Britain, 
France,  and  Italy  tried  to  do  it  in  one  way;  Germany  tried 
it  in  another.  In  the  first  group  England  took  the  lead. 
Sir  Edward  Grey  proposed  that  a  conference  of  the  four 
powers  be  held  to  mediate  between  Russia  and  Austria- 
Hungary  and  work  for  a  satisfactory  solution;  but  with 
such  a  scheme  Germany  would  have  nothing  to  do,  saying 
that  she  could  not  take  part  in  bringing  her  ally  before  a 
European  tribunal.  Germany  had  a  plan  very  different. 
She  attempted  to  terrify  Russia  by  threats  and  so  prevent 
her  supporting  Servians  cause.  The  dispute,  she  said,  was 
an  affair  merely  between  Austria  and  Servia;  no  outside 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR  529 


party  should  intervene;  any  such  intercession  "would  pre- 
cipitate inconceivable  consequences."  The  German  Em- 
peror promised,  indeed,  to  use  his  influence  to  bring  about 
an  understanding  between  Austria  and  Russia,  but  the 
German  Ambassador  in  St.  Petersburg  was  instructed  to 
say  that  Russian  military  measures  would  be  answered  by 
mobilizing  the  German  army,  and  "mobilization  means 
war.'*  July  29th,  the  German  Emperor  telegraphed  to  the 
Tsar  that  it  was  perfectly  possible  for  Russia  to  "remain  a 
spectator"  in  the  Austro-Servian  war.  Next  day  he  said 
the  Tsar  must  decide:  "You  have  to  bear  the  responsi- 
bility for  war  or  peace."  That  is  to  say,  Germany  proba- 
bly wished  that  a  war  be  avoided,  and  preferred  peace,  so 
long  as  she  and  her  ally  got  what  they  asked  for;  otherwise 
they  were  quite  willing  to  fight.  On  the  contrary,  Great 
Britain  and  France,  and,  indeed,  Russia,  earnestly  wished 
to  avoid  war,  and  were  trying  hard^to  bring  about  a  com- 
promise and  satisfactory  arrangement.  Austria  and  Ger- 
many would  make  no  compromise  whatever. 

Meanwhile,  Austrian  armies  continued  their  march  into 
Servia.  The  protests  of  Russia  effected  nothing.  Then 
on  the  night  of  July  29,  almost  at  the  same  moment,  Rus- 
sian and  Austrian  armies  were  mobilized  against  each 
other.  Face  to  face  with  the  dread  conflict  Austria  seemed 
to  hesitate.  Then  Germany  stepped  forward,  and  settled 
the  affair  herself.  Russia,  more  and  more  threatened  by 
Germany,  was  now  mobilizing  all  her  forces.  July  31st,  the 
German  government  demanded  that  Russia  stop  all  mo- 
bilization within  twelve  hours,  and  France  was  asked  what 
she  would  do  if  a  Russo-German  war  were  begun.  Russia 
returned  no  answer.  August  1st,  the  German  Empire  de- 
clared war  upon  Russia. 

Neither  England  nor  France  had  any  direct  interest  in 
Balkan  affairs,  and  both  of i:hem  much  desired  peace.  But 
the  hour  of  fate  was  at  hand  for  France.  The  German 
Ambassador  in  Paris  was  instructed  to  insist  on  a  reply  to 


The  Great 
War  begins 


Germany 
declares  war 
on  France 


530 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Germany 
and  Great 
Britain 


Violation 
of  the 
neutrality 
of  Belgium 


the  German  inquiry,  and  it  is  now  known  that  he  was 
also  instructed,  in  case  France  promised  to  leave  Russia 
to  her  fate,  to  hand  over  to  the  German  authorities  certain 
strong  fortresses  in  pledge.  But  the  reply  was  that 
"France  would  do  that  which  her  interests  dictated." 
Two  days  later,  August  3d,  Germany  declared  war  upon 
France,  falsely  affirming  that  France  had  attacked  her 
first.  Actually  the  French,  in  their  great  desire  to  avoid 
war,  had  drawn  their  forces  back  some  seven  miles  from 
the  frontier.  But  also  in  this  moment  of  destiny  the 
French  people  stood  up  in  unconquerable  spirit  before  the 
greatest  danger  which  had  ever  approached  them. 

The  Continent  was  engulfed  in  the  war  now,  and  Great 
Britain  was  close  to  the  brink.  More  than  any  other 
power  had  England  striven  for  peace..  Every  resource 
had  been  tried.  It  was  not  improbable  that  France  and 
Russia  would  be  crushed,  and  British  statesmen  realized, 
what  many  people  did  not  clearly  see  yet,  that  if  France 
were  destroyed,  then  Britain's  best  friend  would  be  gone, 
and  Britain  would  be  left,  perhaps,  to  face  alone  a  mightier 
Germany  in  the  future.  Yet  the  British  people  and  parlia- 
ment wanted  to  stay  out  of  the  war,  and  France  could  get  no 
assurance  that  England  would  give  her  assistance.  Almost 
certainly  England  would  have  helped  France  before  the 
conflict  was  over,  but  her  support  might  have  been  given 
too  late.  Meanwhile  Germany  was  striving  to  keep  Bri- 
tain out  of  the  war,  and  Sir  Edward  Grey  had  already  de- 
clared that  if  Germany  and  Austria  would  make  "any 
reasonable  proposal"  for  keeping  the  peace  and  it  became 
clear  that  France  and  Russia  were  not  trying  to  keep  it, 
then  Great  Britain  "would  have  nothing  more  to  do  with 
the  consequences." 

An  event  now  occurred  which  caused  Great  Britain  to 
enter  the  struggle  at  once.  Germany  violated  the  neutral- 
ity of  Belgium.  The  plans  of  the  German  General  Stafi^ 
called  for  the   immediate  crushing  of  France  and  then 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR  531 

afterward  attacking  Russia  alone.  If  this  was  to  succeed, 
there  must  be  no  delay.  But  the  frontier  between  Ger- 
many and  France  was  so  strongly  fortified  that  it  seemed 
probable  that  much  time  would  be  lost  in  getting  through. 
Between  Germany  and  France  lay  also  the  neutralized 
countries  of  Switzerland,  Luxemburg,  and  Belgium. 
Both  Luxemburg  and  Belgium  afforded  easy  and  admir- 
able entrance  into  the  most  vital  part  of  France.  It  was 
true,  the  inviolability  of  the  territory  of  these  small  states 
was  guaranteed  by  treaties  which  had  long  been  regarded 
as  sacred  and  as  part  of  the  public  law  of  Europe,  and  it 
was  true  also  that  the  German  Empire  was  engaged  to 
uphold  them.  Nevertheless  Germany  at  once  began 
pouring  an  enormous  force  through  Luxemburg  and  de- 
manded that  the  Belgian  government  allow  free  passage. 
Belgium,  suddenly  asked  to  forfeit  her  neutralization,  and 
threatened  with  terrible  fate  if  she  refused,  bravely  called 
upon  the  German  government  to  keep  its  promise,  and 
then  tried  to  resist  the  German  armies,  which  struck  at 
once.  Immediately  Belgium  appealed  to  the  Great  Powers, 
and  they  promised  such  help  as  they  could  give. 

With  Belgium  in  the  hands  of  a  strong  power  hostile  to  "A  scrap 
Great  Britain,  the  very  existence  of  Britain  would  be  °^  paper" 
threatened.  It  was  therefore  a  cardinal  principle  of  Brit- 
ish statesmanship  that  the  neutrality  and  independence  of 
Belgium  must  be  maintained.  August  4th,  the  British  Am- 
bassador in  Berlin  was  instructed  to  present  an  ultima- 
tum demanding  that  Germany  withdraw  her  forces  from 
Belgium  at  once.  The  Chancellor  of  the  Empire,  von 
Bethmann-Hollweg,  refused,  saying  bitterly  that  England 
was  going  to  war  for  Belgian  neutrality,"  just  for  a  scrap  of 
paper."  So  the  highest  official  of  Germany  spoke  of  the 
treaty  obligations  of  his  government.  Before  the  Reichs- 
tag he  admitted  that  Germany  had  done  wrong — "neces- 
sity knows  no  law."  "From  this  admission,"  said  a  Ger- 
man writer  afterward,  "neither  God  nor  the  devil  will 


582  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

ever  set  us  free."  At  midnight  of  August  4th,  when  the 
time  of  the  ultimatum  had  expired,  Great  Britain  entered 
the  war. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Militarism  and  the  rivalry  of  nations :  A  Gauvain,  L* Europe, 
avant  la  Guerre  (1917) ;  General  C.  von  der  Goltz,  Das  Volk  in 
Wafen,  trans,  by  F.  A.  Ashworth,  A  Nation  in  Arms  (1887);  E. 
F.  Henderson,  Germany* s  Fighting  Machine  (1914) ;  Walter  Lipp- 
man,  The  Stakes  of  Diplomacy  (1915);  J.  Poirier,  VEvolution 
de  VArmee  Allemande  de  1888-1913  (1914);  J.  T.  W.  Newbold, 
How  Europe  Armed  for  War  (1916);  H.  H.  Powers,  The  Things 
Men  Fight  For  (1916),  a  very  suggestive  book;  E.  A.  Pratt,  The 
Rise  of  Rail-Power  in  War  and  Conquest,  1833-19U  (1916). 

Pacifism:  Norman  Angell  [R.  N.  A.  Lane],  The  Great  Illusion 
(ed.  1914),  a  book  which  was  the  cause  of  considerable  mis- 
leading and  delusion;  G.  G.  Coulton,  The  Main  Illusions  of 
Pacijimi  (1916). 

German  spirit  and  ambition:  for  a  brief  statement  the 
most  illuminating  account  is  J.  A.  Cramb,  Germany  and  Eng- 
land (1914),  a  book  of  rare  beauty  and  power;  Friedrich  von 
Bernhardi,  Deutschland  und  der  Ndchste  Krieg  (1911),  trans, 
by  A.  H.  Powles  (1912);  Georges  Bourdon,  VEnigme  Alle- 
mande (1913);  H.  S.  Chamberlain,  trans,  by  John  Lees,  The 
Foundations  of  the  Nineteenth  Century y  2  vols.  (1911);  Wallacf 
Notestein  and  E.  E.  StoU,  Conquest  and  Kultur  (1917),  and  Out 
of  Their  Own  Mouths  (1917),  for  collections  of  extracts  and  quo- 
tations translated;  Jacques  Riviere,  VAllemand  (1918);  Otto- 
Richard  Tannenberg,  Gross-Deutschland  (1911);  R.  G.  Usher 
Pan-Germanism  (1913). 

Diplomatic  negotiations  just  before  the  War:  the  best  and 
most  convenient  collection  for  ordinary  use  continues  to  be 
Collected  Diplomatic  Documents  Relating  to  the  Outbreak  of  the 
European  War  (1914),  published  by  the  British  government; 
E.  R.  O.  von  Mach,  Official  Diplomatic  Documents  Relating  to  the 
Outbreak  of  the  European  War  (1916),  which  contains  photo- 
graphic facsimiles  of  the  first  and  most  important  collections 
of  documents  in  the  original  languages — the  foot-notes,  which 
caused  the  publishers  to  withdraw  the  volume  from  circulation, 
are  to  be  used  with  caution;  J.  B.  Scott,  Diplomatic  Documents 
Relating  to  the  Outbreak  of  the  European  War,  2  vols.  (1916),  a 


r"PK 


w 


'"-% 


t  ^ 


APR 

GENERAL  DRAFTING  CO. INC. N  Y. 


^  /    ^     Khartum/S 


.^11 


.M 


24.    SUPPOS] 


Central  Europe  and  its  Annex,  in  the  Near  East 
(Germany,  Austria,  Hungary,  Bulgaria,  Turkey) 

Territory  occupied  by  Central  Powers 
Germany's  Main  Route  to  the  East 
(Berlin-Bagdad,  Berlin-Hodeida,  Berlin-Cairo-Cape) 
Additional  Routes  ;     ...... 

(Berlin-Trieste,  Berlin-Saloniki-Athens,  Berlin-Constantla-Coifstantinople) 
Portions  under  construction 


RMAN  PLAN 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR     533 

larger  collection.  The  governments  of  the  Central  Powers  at 
first  gave  little  information  about  their  actions  in  these  days, 
but  recently  some  very  full  and  valuable  collections  of  docu- 
ments have  been  published,  especially  for  Germany,  Die 
Deutschen  Dohumente  zum  Kriegsaushruch  ed.  by  Karl  Kautsky, 
4  vols.  (1919);  and  for  Austria-Hungary,  Diplomatische  Akten- 
stucke  zur  Vorgeschichte  des  Krieges,  1914^,  ed.  by  Dr.  Richard 
Gooss,  3  vols.  (1919).  The  best  account  of  the  diplomatic 
negotiations  in  the  critical  days  before  the  beginning  of  the  war 
has  been  J.  W.  Headlam,  The  History  of  Twelve  DaySy  July  2Jfth 
to  August  If-th,  Idllf.  (1915). 

Attempted  justifications:  E.  P.  Barker  and  others,  Why 
We  Are  at  War:  Great  Britain's  Case  (1914);  Colonel  Bauer, 
Konnten  Wir  den  Krieg  Vermeide'n,  Gewinnen,  Abhrechen? 
(1919),  by  one  of  the  officers  of  Ludendorff's  staff;  Deutschland 
und  der  Weltkrieg  (1915),  by  several  authors,  trans,  by  W.  W. 
Whitelock,  Modem  Germany  in  Relation  to  the  Great  War  (1916); 
H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  The  Wary  Its  Causes  and  Its  Issues  (1914);  [Dr. 
Richard  Grelling],  J' Accuse:  von  einem  Deutschen  (1915);  H.  F. 
Helmolt,  Die  Geheime  Vorgeschichte  des  Weltkrieges  (1914); 
Gottlieb  von  Jagow,  Ursachen  und  Ausbruch  des  Weltkrieges 
(1919);  Earl  Loreburn,  Bow  the  War  Came  (1919);  J.  H.  Rose 
The  Origins  of  the  War  (1914);  T.  Schiemann,  Wie  England  eine 
Verstdndigung  mit  Deutschland  Verhinderte  (1915). 

Belgium  and  Luxemburg:  Louis  Renault,  trans,  by  Frank 
Carr,  First  Violations  of  International  Law  by  Germany:  Luxem- 
bourg and  Belgium  (1917). 


The 
Great   War 


The 

ing  forces 


oppos- 


CHAPTER    XI 
THE    GREAT    WAR 

Sunt  lacrimae  rerum  et  mentem  mortalia  tangunt. 
Aeneidy  i.  462. 

The  Great  War  began  August  1,  1914  with  the  declara- 
tion by  the  German  Empire  against  Russia,  and  against 
France  two  days  later.  This  was  followed  by  declarations, 
of  Great  Britain  against  Germany,  of  the  powers  of  the 
Entente  against  Austria-Hungary,  and  of  Japan  against  the 
German  Empire.  By  the  end  of  the  summer  all  of  Europe 
— ^with  the  exception  of  Spain,  Holland,  the  Scandinavian 
countries,  Italy,  Switzerland,  and  some  of  the  nations  of  the 
Balkans,  the  outlying  and  less  important  parts — was  in- 
volved in  the  most  destructive  war  in  the  history  of  modem 
times.  Before  it  ended,  it  brought  a  great  part  of  the  civi- 
lized world  to  the  brink  of  destruction,  and  more  men  were 
killed  or  maimed,  it  is  said,  than  in  all  the  wars  preceding 
since  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  Era. 

It  was  evident,  at  the  beginning  of  the  struggle  that  the 
Germans  and  their  allies  had  great  advantage  from  wonder- 
ful preparation  and  from  striking  suddenly  at  their  chosen 
time;  but  it  was  widely  believed  that  if  only  France 
and  Russia  could  endure  the  assault  a  short  while,  the 
Allies  of  the  Entente,  because  they  had  the  greater  resources 
in  wealth  and  population,  had  the  better  chances  to  win. 
Actually  this  was  not  so.  It  is  certainly  true  that  the 
Germans  expected  a  short  war,  an  easy,  overwhelming 
triumph;  but  when  their  first  rush  had  been  checked,  in 

634 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


535 


the  years  that  followed,  there  were  times  when  their  ad- 
vantages find  resources  were  so  superior  that  time  seemed 
entirely  with  them. 

The  Germans  had  the  largest  number  of  well-drilled, 
thoroughly  trained,  intelligent,  and  devoted  soldiers  pos- 
sessed by  any  power  in  the  world.  France  had  as  brave 
and  as  skilful  soldiers,  but  not  so  great  a  population  and 
not  so  large  an  army  potentially  or  immediately  available. 
Russia  had  great  numbers  of  men,  but  scant  facilities  for 
training  and  equipping  them  as  soldiers.  Germany  could 
put  into  the  field  in  a  short  time  4,000,000  soldiers,  with- 
out superiors  anywhere.  Military  tradition  and  years  of 
training  were  needed  to  make  such  fighting  men  as  hers, 
and  having  them  thus  ready  for  a  sudden  stroke,  it  was 
extremely  probable  that  her  army  could  conquer  any  com- 
bination, while  her  enemies  were  trying  to  create  more 
forces  to  fight  her. 

If  it  required  two  or  three  years  to  make  well  trained 
soldiers,  it  took  much  longer  to  produce  capable  officers. 
Without  skilled  officers  to  lead  the  men  no  great  war  can 
be  won,  and  without  a  great  force  of  reserve  officers  no 
long  conflict  can  be  carried  on  with  any  success.  One 
reason  for  the  failure  of  the  Russian  armies  after  the 
first  year,  was  that  then  most  of  the  trained  officers  with 
whom  Russia  began  the  war  were  dead  or  in  German  prison 
camps.  In  1914  Germany,  of  all  the  powers,  had  the  largest 
number  of  trained  officers,  and  by  far  the  largest  number 
of  officers  in  reserve. 

Far  more  difficult  than  the  getting  of  capable  officers 
or  well-trained  soldiers  was  the  building  up  of  general  mili- 
tary organization,  creating  a  general  staff,  and  finding 
commanders  who  could  lead  large  numbers  of  men.  All 
the  great  powers  had  attempted  to  do  this,  and  some  of 
them  like  Russia,  and  especially  France,  had  achieved  much 
success.  But  in  Germany  the  prevalence  of  military 
atmosphere   and   the   long-continued    military  tradition 


The  German 
army 


The  German 
officers 


German 
commanders 


536  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

and  devotion  to  the  science  of  war  had  given  the  largest 
number  of  higher  commanders  possessed  by  any  na- 
tion. In  the  end  it  was  seen  that  no  German  general 
had  that  sort  of  genius  which  would  entitle  him  to  be 
remembered  among  the  first  military  captains  of  the 
world,  none  like  the  great  Frenchman,  Foch;  but  no  other 
power  had  so  many  leaders  of  corps  and  divisions  and 
armies,  who  had  all  the  advantages  given  by  patient 
study  of  military  things.  And  in  this,  the  result  of  gene- 
rations of  work,  Germany  had  something  which  none  of 
her  enemies  could  create  in  a  short  time  when  the  need 
came. 
Material  Germany  had  at  the  beginning  of  the  war  the  largest 

of  war  amount  of  military  equipment  in  the  world,  and  the  great- 

est facilities  for  immediately  adding  to  her  stock.  The 
bravest  soldiers  only  give  themselves  up  to  slaughter  if, 
without  proper  weapons,  they  fight  against  foes  well 
equipped.  Millions  of  Russians  were  to  fall  because  the 
Russian  armies  were  often  half  armed.  Modern  arma- 
ments are  very  different  from  those  of  earlier  times.  In 
the  Middle  Ages  weapons  were  comparatively  simple,  eas- 
ier to  make,  and  less  expensive.  Many  a  man  had  his 
sword  or  bow  then,  and  armies  could  be  quickly  raised 
because  men  would  quickly  get  weapons  and  assemble 
together.  But  the  scientific  and  industrial  development 
of  modem  times,  especially  the  latter  part  of  the  nine- 
\  teenth  century,   introduced   many   strange,   complicated 

and  expensive  devices,  which  were  not  generally  in  the 
possession  of  the  men  of  the  commonwealth,  could  not  be 
quickly  made,  and  were  only  to  be  got  by  skilled  workmen 
laboring  for  a  long  time.  Rifles,  shells,  cannon,  explosives 
often  required  a  year  or  two  years  to  make.  When  the 
United  States  entered  the  war  later  on,  her  first  year  was 
largely  spent  in  preliminary  preparations  and  getting  the 
necessary  tools;  and  it  was  two  years  before  Great  Britain 
was  able  to  have  in  France  a  large  army  provided  with 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


537 


rifles  and  cannon.  Indeed,  the  great  service  of  France 
was  to  be  that  in  the  west  she  would  hold  Germany  back 
while  England  and  later  America  made  themselves  ready 
to  fight.  In  the  east  Russia,  not  similarly  defended  was 
almost  completely  destroyed  in  the  first  two  years.  It  is 
clear  now  that  a  nation  provided  with  the  enormous  and 
terrible  death-dealing  devices  of  the  latest  age  can  probably 
conquer  all  of  its  enemies  unprepared  before  they  have 
time  to  equip  themselves  with  the  implements  necessary 
for  defence.  Hence  the  Great  War  was  such  a  critical 
period  in  the  history  of  civilization:  had  Germany  tri- 
umphed, she  might  have  conquered  all  her  rivals  and  then 
not  allowed  them  to  arm  themselves,  and  so  maintained 
her  domination  for  ages.  At  all  events,  it  seems  that  Ger- 
many had  prepared  for  the  contest  so  thoroughly  that  when 
she  took  the  field  she  had  more  of  the  material  of  war  than 
existed  then  in  all  the  rest  of  the  world.  Where  the  Rus- 
sians had  one  rifle  for  every  three  soldiers,  Germany 
had  three  rifles  for  every  soldier.  In  heavy  cannon  she  was 
beyond  all  others,  and  she  had  accumulated  shells,  barbed 
wire,  and  warlike  apparatus  in  incredible  amounts. 

Germany  had  the  best  system  of  military  railroads  in 
the  world.  Strategy  is  essentially  the  moving  of  armies. 
Once  this  had  been  done  by  the  marching  of  infantry  as 
quickly  as  possible  over  the  best  roads.  But  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  nineteenth  century  it  was  evident  that  railroads 
would  be  of  immense  importance  in  the  moving  of  armies, 
and  this  was  indeed  seen  to  be  the  case  in  the  American 
Civil  War  (1861-5).  Nowhere  was  this  lesson  taken  to 
heart  so  well  as  in  Germany,  where  more  and  more  the 
railroads  were  laid  out  with  respect  to  military  considera- 
tions. By  1914  there  was  a  magnificent  system,  controlled 
by  the  government  and,  when  necessary,  completely  sub- 
ject to  the  military  authorities,  radiating  out  from  Berlin 
to  all  the  important  fortresses  and  points  near  the  frontiers, 
while  just  within  the  boundaries,  something  like  the  rim 


Railroads 
in  war 


638  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

of  a  wheel,  ran  connecting  lines  along  which  bodies  of  men 
might  be  swiftly  moved  back  and  forth.  Russia  and 
France  had  their  military  railroad  systems  also,  but  not  so 
well-developed  as  the  German.  It  was  by  means  of  this 
system  that  Germany  hurled  at  Belgium  the  mighty  army 
which  so  nearly  crushed  France  at  the  beginning  of  the 
war.  Because  of  it  her  armies  in  East  Prussia  were  re- 
peatedly able  to  disconcert  the  Russians  moving  more 
slowly.  And  because  of  the  advantages  which  her  rail- 
roads gave  her  she  was  soon  able  to  take  from  France  and 
Russia  the  best  of  their  railroads  available  for  campaigns 
against  her. 

Germany  had  at  the  beginning  of  the  war  the  most 
extensive  system  of  spying  and  secret  propaganda  in  the 
world — though  all  the  great  nations  employed  these  devices 
and  some  had  them  highly  developed.  In  Belgium  the 
work  of  the  armies  had  been  prepared  in  advance.  Artil- 
lery distances  had  been  very  accurately  measured,  and 
concrete  foundations  for  great  cannon  had  been  put  under 
tennis  courts  or  factory  buildings.  In  France,  socialists 
were  encouraged  to  prevent  or  confuse  mobilization.  In 
Egypt,  Morocco,  India,  and  Ireland  malcontents  had 
long  been  urged  and  were  now  encouraged  to  rise  against 
England  or  France.  In  Russia,  it  is  said,  huge  bribes  were 
offered  to  commanders  who  would  sell  their  fortresses,  and 
it  was  afterward  learned  that  most  of  the  plans  of  the 
^  Russian  armies  were  sold  by  traitors  to  German  spies,  who 

also  paid  bribes  to  keep  munitions  from  being  dispatched 
to  the  Russian  armies. 
Central  The  Central  Powers  had  advantage  of  position.     They 

position  were  adjacent  and  could  easily  act  together;  the  Allies 

were  separated  and  for  a  long  time  acted  separately. 
Moreover  the  Germans  had  the  central  position  and  the 
"inner  lines,"  much  as  France  had  had  in  the  War  of  the 
Spanish  Succession.  The  Germans  could  move  over  short 
lines  and  strike  in  any  direction  quickly. 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


539 


On  the  other  hand,  the  Allies  had  certain  advantages 
which  often  seemed  too  little  to  bring  them  success  but 
which,  in  the  end,  gave  complete  triumph.  Above  all  they 
had  command  of  the  sea,  which  they  retained  throughout 
the  conflict.  In  this  the  vital  and  indispensable  factor  was 
the  British  navy. 

They  had  greater  resources.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
war  it  looked  as  if  Germany  and  Austria-Hungary  were 
hopelessly  outmatched  in  population  and  resources  of 
materials  and  money.  Germany  was,  however,  ready  for 
a  sudden  stroke  and  so  successful  at  the  start  that  by 
the  end  of  the  first  year  she  had  taken  possession  of  dis- 
tricts in  Belgium,  France,  and  Russia  which  were  of  im- 
mense importance  for  carrying  on  a  European  war,  and 
which  gave  to  her  for  some  time  a  decisive  advantage. 
The  resources  which  she  then  had  under  her  control  en- 
abled her  to  make  twice  as  much  steel,  and  hence  twice  as 
much  war  material  and  munition  as  all  her  opponents 
combined.  Accordingly,  in  1916  and  1917  many  of  the 
best  judges  thought  it  impossible  that  Germany  could  ever 
be  defeated.  All  this  was  changed  by  the  entrance  of  the 
United  States  into  the  conflict,  after  which  the  Allies  had 
once  more  decisive  superiority  in  all  resources. 

However  many  factors  may  have  entered  into  the  war, 
the  conflict  presently  assumed  the  character  of  a  contest 
between  two  different  types  of  civilization  and  mind,  in 
which  the  democratic  systems  of  France,  Britain,  and 
America,  with  their  large  allowance  of  personal  liberty 
and  individual  initiative,  were  matched  against  the  superb- 
ly organized  and  efficient  autocracies  of  central  Europe. 
In  the  end  it  was  found  that  the  democratic  peoples  showed 
greater  tenacity  of  purpose,  higher  intelligence,  and  far 
greater  power  of  adaptability  and  invention.  Every  one 
of  the  frightful  devices,  such  as  poison  gas,  and  submarines 
used  against  merchant  ships,  were  met  and  checked,  and 
in  the  end  excelled  by  new  devices  more  effective  still. 


Superior 
resources 


540 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Tenacity 
and  moral 
courage 


The  German 
plan  of 
campaign 


Such  were  German  methods  and  German  ideals  that  it 
seemed  to  the  Allies  that  a  German  victory  would  bring 
the  destruction  of  the  democratic  and  humanitarian  sys- 
tem toward  which  men  had  so  long  been  striving.  The 
Allies  seemed  almost  hopelessly  defeated  after  two  years 
of  the  war,  but  always  the  cause  for  which  they  were  fight- 
ing nerved  them  to  hold  fast  and  fight  longer.  Back- 
ward Russia  was  the  only  one  of  the  Great  Powers  to  drop 
out  on  the  Allied  side.  It  seemed  to  them  that  the  world 
would  scarcely  be  a  fit  place  to  live  in  if  what  the  Germans 
had  done  was  sealed  with  success.  And  so  they  fought  on. 
Always  too  they  were  supported  by  the  sympathy  of  most 
of  the  neutral  peoples,  and  by  the  fact  that  one  after  an- 
other the  neutrals  were  joining  to  support  their  cause. 
The  Germans  had  no  such  moral  support  as  this.  They 
believed  their  cause  a  good  one,  but  in  a  different  way. 
They  were  strong  in  their  courage  and  confidence,  in  the 
midst  of  success,  but  when  the  war  began  to  go  against 
them  decisively,  they  did  not  persist  as  France  had  done 
almost  against  all  hope,  but  collapsed  completely  before 
the  war  even  reached  their  frontiers. 

The  German  plan  of  campaign  had  been  arranged  long 
before  the  war.  The  armies  of  the  empire  could  be  mo- 
bilized so  quickly  that  Germany  could  always  strike  before 
any  of  her  foes.  This,  joined  with  the  advantage  of  in- 
terior position,  enabled  her  to  strike  at  her  enemies  as  she 
chose,  and  attempt  to  destroy  them  separately.  She 
had  planned  to  crush  first  the  enemy  most  immediately 
dangerous,  and  afterward  turn  upon  those  who  could  not 
move  so  quickly,  and  destroy  them  also.  The  first  attack, 
then,  must  be  upon  France,  who  had  an  army  not  so  large 
as  the  German,  but  exceedingly  good,  and  who  could,  per- 
haps, mobilize  almost  as  rapidly  as  she.  Therefore,  the 
Germans  designed  to  make  an  immediate  and  terrible 
thrust,  hoping  that  France  would  be  completely  undone 
in  less  than  two  months,  after  which  would  come  the  turn 


THE  GREAT  WAR  541 

of  the  Russians,  who  would  in  any  event  be  held  by  the 
Austrians  while  France  was  dealt  with. 

But  for  the  success  of  this  plan  the  indispensable  condi-  Entrance 
tion,  it  was  thought,  was  that  France  should  be  over-  i^*®  France 
whelmed  without  any  delay;  and  it  would  not  be  easy  to 
do  this,  since  the  short  frontier  between  France  and  Ger- 
many was  strongly  fortified  on  both  sides — by  a  line  of 
fortresses  from  Verdun  down  to  Belfort,  and  from  Strass- 
burg  down  to  Neu  Breisach.  Here  the  French  positions 
could  probably  be  forced  only  after  much  delay  and  enor- 
mous losses.  Accordingly,  for  some  years  it  had  seemed 
possible  that  when  Germany  next  attacked  France,  her 
armies  would  march  up  the  valley  of  the  Meuse,  the  best 
of  all  entrances  into  France  from  Germany,  even  though 
this  line  of  march  lay  across  the  territory  of  Belgium, 
whose  neutralization  had  been  guaranteed  by  the  German 
Empire  along  with  the  other  Great  Powers.  If  Germany 
abided  by  her  word,  then  France  would  not  be  struck  in 
this  quarter;  otherwise  she  might  be  attacked  either 
through  Alsace-Lorraine  or  through  the  Meuse  Valley. 
Unfortunately  she  could  not  know  whether  the  Germans 
would  keep  their  engagement.  In  any  event  at  the  be- 
ginning France  could  concentrate  for  defence  only  about 
half  as  many  troops  as  Germany  could  use  in  the  thrust 
against  her,  and,  in  accordance  with  well-known  principles 
of  strategy,  it  was  wisest  for  her  to  keep  most  of  them  con- 
centrated in  one  large  body.  So,  the  French  determined 
to  ignore  the  possibility  of  an  attack  through  Belgium, 
concentrate  against  Alsace-Lorraine,  and,  following  the 
best  principles  of  military  science,  take  the  offensive,  if 
they  could.  This  they  did,  in  the  earliest  days  of  the  war, 
attacking  through  the  Lost  Provinces,  and  gaining  some 
slight  success;  but  they  were  soon  repulsed  in  Alsace  and 
badly  defeated  in  Lorraine,  this  being  due  partly  to  mis- 
management and  very  largely  to  German  superiority  in 
machine  guns  and  heavy  artillery. 


542 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  in- 
vasion of 
Belgium 


The    British 
and  the 
French 
defeated 


But  the  Germans  were  merely  holding  their  lines  with 
comparatively  small  forces  in  the  south.  Their  great 
effort  was  through  Belgium,  straight  at  the  heart  of 
France.  Their  line  of  march  was  barred  by  the  strong 
fortresses  of  Liege  and  Namur,  with  Antwerp  supposedly 
impregnable,  threatening  their  flank  from  the  north. 
Against  the  avalanche  of  German  soldiers  the  brave  little 
Belgian  army  could  do  nothing  but  fight  retarding  actions, 
but  it  was  hoped  that  the  fortresses  would  hold  until  assis- 
tance came  from  England  and  France.  The  Germans  were 
indeed,  checked  at  first  at  Liege,  but  immediately  they 
revealed  to  the  world  one  of  the  great  surprises  of  the  war. 
Against  Liege  they  brought  up  quickly  incredibly  large 
cannon  which  they  moved  easily  on  great  broad  wheels 
up  to  positions  prepared  by  secret  agents  in  advance,  and 
having  ready  at  hand  the  exact  distances  dropped  ten- 
and  twelve-inch  shells  upon  the  forts  reducing  them  at 
once.  Then,  bringing  up  their  monstrous  42-centimeter 
guns,  which  fired  sixteen-inch  shells,  they  captured  Namur. 
All  the  western  world  was  appalled  at  the  news  that  this 
fortress  had  fallen  in  one  day,  and  that  the  road  into 
France  was  open. 

Through  Belgium  by  forced  marches  came  such  an  army 
as  the  world  had  never  seen  before — gray -clad  soldiers  in 
unending  stream,  equipped  to  the  last  detail,  and  accom- 
panied by  the  most  fearful  engines  of  destruction.  The 
Belgian  army  was  flung  aside  upon  Antwerp,  which  was 
masked,  and  which  the  Germans  took  two  months  later 
when  they  had  leisure  to  bring  up  their  heavy  cannon. 
Brussels  fell  without  resistance,  and  when  the  campaign 
was  over  it  was  found  that  all  of  Belgium,  except  for  one 
little  section  on  the  Channel,  adjoining  France,  had  been 
taken  at  a  stroke.  The  British  and  the  French  did  try  to 
come  to  the  rescue,  but  they  could  not  send  strong  forces 
at  once,  and  those  which  they  sent  came  too  late.  The 
French  were  heavily  defeated  at  Charleroi  and  the  British 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


543 


at  Mons,  narrowly  escaping  destruction  as  they  retreated 
precipitately  back  into  France. 

For  France  the  situation  rapidly  became  almost  hope- 
less. Her  army,  smaller  than  the  German,  was  in  the 
wrong  place.  Shifting  a  large  number  of  soldiers  is  one 
of  the  most  complicated  and  diflScult  tasks  in  the  world, 
and  it  was  very  doubtful  whether  the  French  commanders 
could  do  it,  with  the  Germans  rushing  down  now  upon 
Paris.  In  the  course  of  three  weeks,  almost  by  a  mi- 
racle, they  accomplished  the  maneuver,  but  by  the  end 
of  September,  when  this  had  been  done,  the  French 
armies  had  undergone  a  succession  of  disastrous  de- 
feats. The  French  government  moved  from  Paris  to 
Bordeaux,  and  it  was  evident  that  one  of  the  great  crises 
in  Europe's  history  was  at  hand.  The  Germans  believed 
that  they  would  soon  have  the  French  army  cut  off  and 
surrounded,  and  would  speedily  capture  Paris.  It  almost 
seemed  that  they  would  crush  France  in  six  weeks,  as 
they  boasted. 

The  French  people  did  not  despair.  They  rose  now  to 
a  height  of  grandeur  which  surprised  their  Enemies  and 
their  friends,  something  that  had  before  happened  not  sel- 
dom in  the  history  of  France.  The  frontier  fortresses 
held  from  Belfort  northward,  above  all  the  immensely 
important  pivot  position  at  Verdun.  Between  Verdun 
and  the  huge  entrenched  camp  at  Paris  the  retreating 
French  armies  were  forced  back  until  their  line  bulged  far 
down  in  the  center  and  threatened  to  burst  asunder,  while 
the  Germans  under  Von  Kluck  threatened  to  outflank  the 
end  of  the  line  near  Paris.  September  5th,  the  matter  at  last 
came  to  issue.  German  horsemen  had  just  ridden  into  the 
outskirts  of  Paris,  but  Von  Kluck,  confronting  the  fortress 
and  a  French  army  not  yet  destroyed,  had  turned  aside 
from  the  capital,  and  thus  left  his  own  flank  exposed. 
Joffre,  commander  of  the  French,  unable  to  stand  at  first, 
had  retreated  steadily  to  positions  which  he  considered 


France  on 
the  brink  of 
destruction 


Retreat  of 
the  French 
army 


544 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The   Battle 
of  the 
Mame 


favorable  for  a  battle.  "  The  hour  has  come,"  he  said  now, 
in  a  famous  order,  "  to  hold  at  all  costs  and  allow  oneself  to 
be  slain  rather  than  give  way.  .  .  .  Everything  de- 
pends on  the  result  of  to-morrow." 

September  6th  began  the  series  of  mortal  combats  ex- 
tending for  a  great  distance  and  fought  between  1,500,000 
Germans  with  4,000  cannon  besides  their  monstrous, 
heavy  guns,  and  1,000,000  Frenchmen  with  a  small  but 
excellent  British  force.  From  the  river  which  flows 
through  this  part  of  the  country  the  conflict  is  known  as 
the  Battle  of  the  Marne.  The  Germans  were  superior  in 
numbers  and  equipment  and  flushed  with  a  mighty  tri- 
umph. The  French  were  numerically  inferior  and  dis- 
heartened by  disaster.  But  the  Germans  were  now 
wearied  from  their  rapid  advance  and  far  from  their  base, 
while  the  French  were  close  to  their  own,  in  favorable 
positions.  For  four  days  the  great  battle  raged.  The 
Germans  fought  bravely  and  well,  but  the  French  soldiers, 
with  backs  to  the  wall,  with  everything  now  and  in  the 
future  at  stake,  rose  to  prodigies  of  valor.  Generally 
the  French  line  held  at  all  points,  and  the  battle  was  de- 
cided by  two  great  German  reverses.  Near  Paris  their 
line  was  defeated  after  a  terrible  combat,  they  were  nearly 
outflanked,  and  saved  themselves  only  by  precipitate  re- 
treat, at  times  almost  like  a  rout;  and  their  backward 
movement  gradually  compelled  other  German  armies 
near  by  to  give  groimd  and  go  back  with  them.  Mean- 
while, in  the  center  the  Germans  nearly  broke  through, 
and  threatened  to  cut  the  French  line;  but  General  Foch, 
four  times  attacking  them  in  turn,  and  four  times  de- 
feated, attacked  once  again,  completely  defeated  the 
Prussian  Guard,  and  broke  through  the  German  line.  By 
September  10th,  the  decision  had  come;  and  by  the  middle 
of  the  month  the  Germans  had  retreated  from  a  large 
part  of  the  conquests  they  had  made,  Paris  was  safe,  and 
the  French  army  was  saved. 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


545 


The  Battle  of  the  Marne  was  the  most  decisive  incident 
in  the  Great  War.  It  was  the  most  decisive  battle  in  the 
history  of  Europe  since  the  battle  of  Blenheim  (1704). 
Had  the  Germans  won  the  battle,  almost  certainly  the 
French  army  would  have  been  destroyed,  or  at  best  driven 
south  of  the  Loire,  leaving  Paris  and  all  north  and  east 
France,  including  the  principal  railways  and  industrial 
regions,  in  the  enemy's  hands,  completely  cutting  off  what 
remained  of  France  from  good  connection  with  England. 
Most  probably  the  Germans  could  then  have  held  their 
lines  in  the  west  with  few  troops,  turned  on  Russia  and 
soon  destroyed  her,  as  they  did  anyhow  somewhat  later, 
then  have  come  back  to  the  west,  completed  the  destruction 
of  France,  and  undertaken  the  conquest  of  England.  If 
England  and  the  British  fleet  had  passed  under  their  sway, 
no  other  nation  could  have  resisted  their  aggression;  and 
the  "  world  power,"  which  Bernhardi  had  spoken  of,  might 
conceivably  have  been  theirs  for  a  great  while  to  come.  So 
strong  was  the  military  power  of  the  Germans  in  1914  that 
they  could  have  defeated  all  other  powers,  if  those  powers 
were  not  given  time  to  prepare.  The  British  Empire  and 
the  United  States  could  defeat  the  Germans  later  on,  but 
not  without  some  years  to  raise  their  armies  and  equip 
them.  They  had  the  necessary  time  only  because  mean- 
while the  French  held  the  lines  in  the  west,  and  this  would 
have  been  impossible  except  for  the  triumph  on  the 
Marne. 

But  actually,  at  the  time,  it  seemed  to  the  Germans  that 
they  had  been  merely  repulsed,  not  badly  defeated;  that 
later  on  they  would  return  and  not  fail.  Moreover,  in 
the  campaign  they  had  had  enormous  success.  They  went 
back  after  their  defeat  from  the  vicinity  of  Paris,  and 
evacuated  a  considerable  portion  of  France;  but  they 
halted  along  the  Aisne  River  and,  there  entrenched,  defied 
every  attack  of  the  Allies.  They  had  conquered  and  they 
held  behind  their  lines  the  richest  industrial  district  of 


Immense 
importance 
of  the 
battle 


Great  suc- 
cess of  the 
Germans 


25.    THE  WESTERN  FRONT  IN  THE  GREAT  WAR 


546 


26.    THE  EASTERN  FRONT  IN  THE  GREAT  WAR' 


547 


548 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


struggle 
for  the 
Channel 
Ports 


The  line 
in  the  west 


France  and  the  principal  source  of  France's  supply  of  coal 
and  iron  ore.  No  longer,  except  for  outside  assistance, 
could  the  French  make  suflScient  munitions.  When,  in 
the  following  year,  in  the  east  the  Germans  had  taken  from 
the  Russians  Poland  and  the  districts  near  by,  much  the 
same  was  the  case  with  the  Russians,  and  by  the  autumn 
of  1915  the  Germans  had  definitely  won  the  war  on  the 
Continent  of  Europe.  Russia  was  not  able  to  recover;  but 
France,  supplied  from  abroad  with  materials  for  war, 
continued  the  struggle.  This  was  possible  only  because 
of  the  British  fleet. 

The  French  and  the  British  lacked  the  heavy  artillery 
and  the  shells  to  drive  the  Germans  back  from  the  Alsne, 
but  they  wisely  extended  their  own  lines  northward  just  in 
time  to  keep  the  Germans  from  occupying,  as  they  might 
easily  have  done,  the  Channel  ports,  Calais  and  Dunkirk, 
the  gateway  to  England.  All  too  late  the  Germans  real- 
ized the  supreme  importance  of  these  places,  and  launched 
a  series  of  mass  attacks  upon  the  British  and  the  French 
in  an  effort  to  break  through  at  all  costs.  At  Ypres,  where 
the  British  held  against  terrible  odds,  and  along  the  Yser 
River,  where  the  British,  Belgians,  and  French  were  almost 
annihilated  but  held  out  until  the  country  was  flooded  and 
warships  at  sea  joined  in  the  defence,  the  Germans  were 
held  back  from  their  goal.  The  result  of  this  action  was 
almost  as  important  as  the  victory  of  the  Marne. 

For  a  while,  in  the  west  the  great  movements  came 
to  an  end.  The  Germans  had  won  mighty  triumphs, 
but  they  had  failed  to  win  the  war  quickly.  Both  sides 
now  settled  down  in  long  fortified  lines,  which  ran  from 
Switzerland  to  the  North  Sea,  which  left  to  the  French  a 
small  part  of  German  Alsace,  but  left  within  the  German 
lines  northeastern  France  and  almost  all  of  Belgium. 
These  lines  were  constantly  made  stronger  on  both  sides, 
until  at  last  it  seemed  impossible  that  they  could  ever  be 
broken. 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


549 


Meanwhile  great  things  were  happening  in  the  east. 
While  Germany  hurled  herself  upon  France,  she  left  her 
eastern  borders  nearly  unprotected,  believing  that  the 
Russians  could  not  immediately  do  much  damage,  and  re- 
lying on  the  Austrians  in  the  meantime  to  meet  them. 
The  Austrians  did,  indeed,  begin  an  offensive  into  Russian 
Poland,  but  they  were  at  once  met  by  the  advancing  Rus- 
sian armies,  and  hurled  back  in  disastrous  defeat.  After 
a  series  of  great  battles  the  Russians  overran  nearly  all  of 
Galicia,  the  exposed  part  of  Austria-Hungary,  drove  on  the 
Austrian  armies  in  precipitate  rout,  and  captured  all  but 
one  of  the  Galician  fortresses.  Austria  had  utterly  failed 
to  check  the  Russians,  and  in  a  short  time  was  calling  for 
assistance  from  the  Germans. 

While  the  Austrians  were  being  driven  back  from  Poland 
another  Russian  army  invaded  Germany  itself.  In  a  short 
time  part  of  East  Prussia  had  been  crossed.  At  once  a 
strong  force  was  sent  across  Germany,  and  this  army  under 
a  new  commander.  Von  Hindenburg,  caught  the  Russians 
in  the  region  of  the  Mazurian  marshes  and  lakes,  and  there 
at  the  battle  of  Tannenberg,  a  force  of  250,000  Russians 
was  scattered  or  destroyed.  Some  escaped,  many  thous- 
ands were  paraded  in  triumph  through  the  Berlin  streets, 
but  a  host  of  them  were  killed  by  the  great  shells  or  smoth- 
ered in  the  mud  of  the  marshes.  It  was  as  complete  a 
triumph  as  the  victory  of  Hannibal  at  Cannae;  yet  such 
were  the  proportions  of  the  Great  War  that  it  was  merely 
an  episode  in  the  struggle.  East  Prussia  was  cleared  of 
the  foe;  but  it  is  believed  that  the  absence  from  the  west 
front  of  the  German  soldiers  who  did  this  had  some  con- 
nection with  the  victory  of  the  French  at  the  Marne. 

In  1915  the  Germans,  holding  the  initiative  as  before, 
changed  their  general  plan.  They  had  intended  to  over- 
whelm France  and  then  destroy  Russia.  In  this  they  had 
failed.  They  now  determined  to  hold  France  and  Britain, 
standing  on  the  defensive  in  their  entrenchments  in  the 


Russia 
shatters  the 
Austrian 
power 


Russians 
defeated    in 
East  Prussia 


Struggle 
in  the  east, 
1914-15 


550  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

west,  and  turn  their  principal  effort  to  destroying  the 
Russians  completely.  During  the  winter  of  1914-15  there 
was  terrible  and  dreary  fighting  in  the  east  as  the  Germans 
came  to  the  aid  of  their  demoralized  Austrian  allies.  On 
the  wintry  plains  of  Poland,  and  farther  north  along  the 
Russian  border,  great  battles  were  fought,  until  presently 
the  two  sides  settled  down  in  lines  of  entrenchments  longer 
but  less  strong  than  those  in  the  west.  In  March,  the 
Russians  took  the  great  fortress  of  Przemysl,  the  last 
stronghold  in  Galicia,  together  with  a  huge  Austrian 
army.  All  through  the  winter  they  had  been  fighting  in 
the  heights  of  the  Carpathian  Mountains  for  possession  of 
the  passes;  now  they  had  all  but  the  most  important  one 
of  them,  and  threatened  to  pour  down  into  Hungary  in  a 
torrent.  They  were  also  near  to  the  great  fortress  of  Cra- 
cow, the  fall  of  which  might  open  the  way  into  the  German 
Empire. 

But  as  spring  began  the  Germans  and  Austrians  were 
ready  for  a  decisive  blow.  About  the  center  of  the  long 
irregular  line,  not  far  from  Cracow,  an  immense  concen- 
tration of  men  and  cannon  was  made.  May  2d,  after 
a  fearful  bombardment — the  like  of  which  had  never  before 
been  seen  and  which  annihilated  the  Russians  and  com- 
pletely obHterated  their  lines  for  a  space  of  some  miles — the 
Teutonic  armies,  launching  a  great  attack,  broke  completely 
through  the  Russian  position.  This  is  one  of  the  greatest 
disasters  that  can  happen  to  an  army,  and  often  results 
in  utter  rout.  The  only  hope  is  in  rapid  retreat  until  the 
parts  disunited  are  rejoined.  This  the  Russians  tried  to 
do,  and  in  the  main  their  backward  movement  was  well 
carried  out ;  it  was  never  turned  into  rout,  nor  was  their  main 
force  ever  surrounded  and  captured.  But  the  danger  was* 
very  terrible.  When  the  break-through  occurred  at  the 
Dunajec  River,  the  Russian  forces  in  Galicia  and  in  the 
Carpathians  were  in  imminent  danger  of  being  cut  off,  and 
while  they  were  being  pressed  by  Teutonic  armies  under 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


551 


Von  Mackensen,  farther  north  they  were  being  attacked 
by  the  German  armies  of  Von  Hindenburg. 

So  began  a  great  and  disastrous  retreat.  The  Russians 
fled  from  the  Carpathian  Mountains;  they  quickly  aban- 
doned nearly  all  of  Galicia  together  with  the  great  for- 
tresses which  they  had  captured  after  so  much  effort;  and 
at  the  same  time  they  were  retreating  back  through  Poland, 
fighting  bitter  rear-guard  actions,  but  never  really  able 
to  halt  the  pursuit.  The  outlying  Polish  fortresses  were 
taken;  then  Warsaw,  the  capital;  then  the  second-line 
fortresses;  presently  Brest-Litovsk,  the  center  of  the 
Russian  system  of  defence,  and  even  cities  and  strong 
points  beyond.  When  at  last  the  retreat  came  to  an  end, 
it  was  found  that  the  Germans  had,  indeed,  fallen  short  of 
entire  success,  for  they  had  not  completely  destroyed  the 
Russian  armies,  nor  had  they  put  Russia  utterly  out  of 
the  war.  But  Russia  was  virtually  eliminated  in  this  cam- 
paign. A  vast  number  of  her  soldiers  had  been  killed  or 
disabled,  and  an  equally  great  number  taken  prisoner  by 
the  Germans.  Most  of  her  trained  officers  were  now  cap- 
tive or  dead.  Most  of  the  war  material  was  worn  out  or 
lost,  and  Russia  was  neither  an  industrial  nation  capable 
of  making  arms  and  ammunition  on  a  great  scale  nor 
so  situated  that  she  could,  like  France,  easily  receive 
great  supplies  from  outside.  Moreover,  her  railroads  best 
adapted  for  military  purpose  had  fallen  into  the  enemy's 
hands.  Russia  did  continue  to  fight  valiantly  for  some 
time,  and  she  accomplished  some  great  things  in  the  follow- 
ing year;  but  as  we  see  it  now,  she  was  definitely  defeated 
in  the  campaign  which  began  on  the  Dunajec. 

Thus,  in  the  course  of  little  more  than  a  year — for  Brest- 
Litovsk  fell  in  August  and  Vilna  in  September,  1915 — Ger- 
many had  greatly,  though  not  completely  succeeded  in  the 
west,  and  far  more  greatly  succeeded  in  the  east.  In  the 
autumn  she  turned  her  attention  to  the  south,  and  soon 
accomplished  the  task  for  which  she  had  begun  the  war: 


The  Russian 
retreat 


Conquest 
of  Servia 


55Z  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

the  getting  control  of  the  Balkans.  Thus  far  the  Serbs 
had  been  able  to  defend  themselves.  Twice  had  the  Aus- 
trians,  occupied  as  they  were  by  their  contest  with  Russia, 
sent  expeditions  over  the  Danube;  twice  had  they  been 
driven  back  in  shameful  defeat  and  disaster.  But  now  a 
third  invasion  was  undertaken  by  the  Germans,  at  a  time 
when  Russia  could  give  no  more  help,  and,  worse  still,  as 
the  little  country  was  struck  in  the  flank  by  Bulgaria,  who 
now  entered  the  war  on  the  side  of  the  Central  Powers. 
The  exhausted  Serbs  were  ground  to  pieces  by  the  Teutons 
from  the  north  and  the  vengeful  Bulgarians  from  the  east; 
their  country  was  completely  subjugated;  and  only  a  part 
of  the  Servian  army  and  a  few  of  the  people  escaped  over 
the  mountains  in  a  horrible  retreat,  to  be  taken  to  islands 
off  the  coast  by  Allied  warships. 

Meanwhile  the  Allies  had  suffered  a  great  defeat.  In 
November  1914,  Turkey  had  entered  the  war  on  the  side 
of  Germany  and  Austria.  This  more  than  balanced  the 
decision  of  Italy  not  to  assist  the  Central  Powers,  for  it 
almost  completely  cut  off  Russia  from  her  western  part- 
ners, making  it  very  difficult  for  them  to  obtain  her  wheat, 
which  they  badly  needed,  and  just  as  hard  for  her  to  re- 
ceive from  them  the  war  supplies  without  which  she  could 
not  long  do  much.  It  was  of  the  greatest  importance  that 
communications  be  opened  up  again  by  forcing  the  Darda- 
nelles and  afterward  taking  Constantinople.  Moreover, 
this  would  not  only  assist  Russia,  but  it  would  be  a 
momentous  success  in  itself,  and  bring  to  an  end,  perhaps, 
the  German  dream  of  mastery  in  the  Balkans  and  Asiatic 
Turkey.  Therefore,  in  February,  1915,  British  and  French 
warships  attempted  to  force  the  Strait  of  the  Dardanelles. 
After  severe  losses  they  desisted,  though  it  is  said  that 
victory  was  within  reach  if  they  had  attacked  again  the 
next  day.  A  great  expedition  was  now  sent  out  to  take 
the  positions  which  guarded  the  entrance,  and  in  April  a 
landing  was  effected  on  the  Gallipoli  Peninsula. 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


553 


In  all  the  war  there  was  no  more  glorious  and  disastrous 
enterprise  than  this  attempt  to  scale  the  barren,  rocky 
mountains  that  guarded  the  strait.  Even  the  drinking 
water  had  to  be  brought  from  a  long  distance,  and  numbers 
went  insane  from  thirst.  Many  a  heroic  attempt  was  made, 
and  the  fighting  went  on  all  through  the  time  when  the 
Russians  were  being  defeated  to  the  north.  One  day  Allied 
soldiers  won  to  the  top  of  the  mountains  and  saw  the  blue 
waters  of  Marmora  in  the  distance;  but  they  were  soon 
driven  out.  The  Turks  fought  with  stubborn  courage 
until  the  Germans,  having  put  Russia  out  of  the  way  and 
destroyed  Servia,  were  coming  to  relieve  them.  Gallipoli 
was  evacuated,  and  the  troops  thus  withdrawn  were  taken 
to  the  Greek  city  of  Salonica,  the  most  important  position 
on  the  iEgean,  to  which  they  had  been  invited  by  the 
Greek  government,  though  the  invitation  was  withdrawn 
by  the  King  of  Greece. 

If  the  Germans  could  only  hold  what  they  had  seized, 
they  would  come  out  of  the  struggle  incomparably  the 
greatest  power  in  the  world.  Accordingly,  they  chose  this 
moment  to  let  it  be  known  that  they  would  listen  to  pro- 
posals for  peace.  But  however  great  the  disasters  which 
had  come  to  the  Allies  in  the  war,  the  consequences  of  such 
a  peace  as  Germany  would  be  willing  to  make  seemed  too 
terrible,  and  the  German  suggestions  were  not  even  con- 
sidered. Besides,  it  still  seemed  to  many  that  the  future 
lay  with  the  Allies;  that  they  had  been  taken  unprepared, 
and  that  soon  they  would  be  able  to  wage  the  war  on  equal 
terms,  and  get  victory  shortly  after. 

One  great  success  they  had :  Germany  had  been  swept 
from  the  seas.  All  her  ocean  commerce  had  vanished;  and 
her  warships  stayed  close  to  the  fortifications  of  Heligoland 
and  the  Kiel  Canal.  German  submarines  did  some  execu- 
tion against  British  warships  at  first,  but  this  soon  came 
to  an  end.  German  cruisers  made  daring  raids,  but  only 
for  a  while.    At  first  much  damage  was  done  to  Allied 


The  Allies 
fail 


Triumph  of 
the  Teutonic 
Powers 


The  Allies 
control  the 
sea 


554 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  battle  of 
Jutland,  1916 


The    British 
Grand  Fleet 


shipping  by  German  raiders;  one  by  one,  however,  they 
were  hunted  down,  and  this  came  to  an  end.  In  Novem- 
ber, 1914,  in  the  Far  East  the  German  naval  base  of  Tsingtao 
had  been  taken  by  the  Japanese.  A  German  fleet  did 
destroy  an  inferior  British  fleet  off  the  coast  of  Chile,  but 
shortly  after  it  was  completely  destroyed  by  a  superior 
British  force  off  the  Falkland  Islands.  Meanwhile  the 
British  and  the  French  fleets  had  complete  control  of  the 
oceans,  over  which  their  commerce  flowed  in  unceasing 
stream.  Only  once  was  there  a  great  battle  on  the  sea. 
May  31,  1916  the  German  fleet  cruising  off  the  coast  of 
Denmark  was  overtaken  by  a  part  of  the  British  Grand 
Fleet.  The  powerful  but  lightly  armored  British  battle 
cruisers  engaged  the  enemy,  hoping  to  hold  them  until 
the  remainder  of  the  British  fleet  arrived.  The  Germans 
fought  with  great  skill  and  superior  equipment,  inflicting 
heavy  losses.  As  the  rest  of  the  British  ships  arrived  the 
Germans  withdrew,  and  in  the  failing  light  of  the  evening 
made  good  their  escape.  They  had  inflicted  more  damage 
than  they  suffered,  and  they  proclaimed  a  great  victory  won. 
After  a  few  days,  however,  it  was  seen  that  the  action  was 
essentially  a  British  victory,  for  Britain's  hold  on  the  seas 
continued  unshaken.  The  German  battleships  had  with- 
drawn to  their  haven,  and  the  spirit  of  the  crews  was 
broken.  They  did  not  again  come  forth  to  fight  for  con- 
trol of  the  waters.  When  they  next  emerged  it  was  to 
yield  themselves  in  ignominious  surrender. 

The  French  fleet  and  later  the  Italian  fleet,  in  the  Medi- 
terranean, and  in  the  latter  part  of  the  war  the  powerful 
American  fleet,  contributed  materially  to  maintaining  the 
Allied  mastery  of  the  seas.  But  this  command  of  the 
waters  was  owing  primarily  to  the  ships  of  the  British 
Empire.  Silently,  and  with  little,  said  about  what  was  be- 
ing done,  in  the  fair  weather  of  summer  and  in  the  storms 
and  sleet  and  cold  of  the  North  Sea  winters,  unfaltering 
and  with  vigilance  unceasing,  the  prolonged  watch  was 


THE  GREAT  WAR  555 

kept.  Always  there  was  danger  from  the  mines  which 
Germans  strewed  in  the  sea;  always  the  submarines  were 
lurking  to  send  in  their  deadly  torpedoes.  There  was  the 
blockade  to  maintain,  by  which  Germany  was  slowly  weak- 
ened and  reduced;  there  were  the  all-important  lines  of  com- 
munication across  to  France  to  keep  open;  there  were  the 
sea  routes  to  be  kept  safe  between  the  parts  of  the  widely 
scattered  empire  and  to  the  other  countries  from  which 
came  indispensable  supplies;  the  German  warships  were 
watched  lest  they  raid  the  coasts  of  England  or  lest  some 
of  them  dash  out  into  the  open  sea  to  prey  upon  Allied 
commerce;  and  above  all  the  High  Seas  Fleet  of  the  Ger- 
man Empire  was  to  be  waited  for  and  met  if  ever  it  dared 
to  come  out.  And  on  this  faithful  watch  and  ward  the 
whole  Allied  cause  depended.  If  ever  the  Grand  Fleet 
were  destroyed  or  beaten,  in  a  short  time  the  British  Em- 
pire would  be  starved  into  complete  surrender,  and  then 
triumphant  Germany  could  dictate  to  the  rest  of  the  world 
such  conditions  as  pleased  her.  Now  that  the  war  is  over, 
the  work  of  the  British  seaman  stands  out  in  its  true  pro- 
portions and  grandeur. 

For  some  time  it  seemed  that  Germany  could  win  the     Slow 
war  in  spite  of  the  naval  superiority  of  the  Allies.     It  was     ^^°^'f  f,*  °^ 
evident  that  the  Central  Powers  could  not  be  starved  into     j,n  i^nd 
submission  by  the  blockade,  but  must  be  beaten  also  on 
land.     At  first  it  was  hoped  that  this  could  be  done  when 
the  powers  of  the  Entente  were  more  fully  prepared.     Bri- 
tain was  arming,  and  would  presently  be  ready;  and  in 
May  1915,  Italy — partly  through  real  sympathy  with  the 
western   powers   and   horror   at   German   methods,   and 
partly  through  desire  of  getting  from  Austria-Hungary 
Italia  Irredenta  and  power  in  the  Adriatic — declared  war 
on  the  Dual  Monarchy.     But  Italy  was  at  once  halted  by 
the  terrible  obstacle  of  the  Alps  and  made  scarcely  any 
progress;  and  it  required  more  than  a  year  for  Britain  to 
put  a  great  army  in  France.     So,  in  1915,  while  Russia 


556  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

was  being  defeated  and  Servia  destroyed,  the  Allies  accom- 
plished little  in  the  west.  The  British  made  some  slight 
progress  at  Neuve  Chapelle;  but  immediately  the  Germans, 
using  for  the  first  time  their  horrible  poison  gas,  attacked 
near  by  at  Ypres,  and  nearly  broke  through  to  the  ports  of 
the  Channel.  That  they  failed  to  do  this  was  because  the 
Canadians,  who  had  thrown  themselves  heart  and  soul 
into  the  war  along  with  Great  Britain,  closed  the  gap  and 
held  the  line.  In  September  the  French,  attacking  in  the 
Champagne,  after  tremendous  artillery  preparation,  tried 
to  break  the  German  lines  as  the  Germans  had  broken  the 
Russian;  but  after  some  success  in  the  beginning  they 
were  brought  to  a  halt,  with  nothing  of  importance  accom- 
plished. In  all  respects  1915  was  a  year  of  Allied  failure 
and  German  success. 

Slow  as  it  seemed,  Britain  was  really  assembling  a  great 
army  in  northern  France,  well  drilled  and  fully  equipped. 
Some  time  in  1916  she  would  be  ready  for  her  first  great 
effort.  But  again  Germany  was  ready  to  take  the  initia- 
tive, and  she  resolved  to  make  a  second  thrust  at  France, 
to  destroy  her  before  England  could  throw  in  her  might. 
Therefore,  near  to  the  key  fortress  of  Verdun,  very  secretly 
an  enormous  concentration  of  artillery  was  made.  Sud- 
denly toward  the  end  of  February,  1916,  a  terrible  bom- 
bardment was  begun  from  thousands  of  cannon,  followed 
by  an  attack,  which  at  once  carried  all  the  eastern  environs 
of  the  fortress.  So  quickly  was  this  accomplished  that  it 
seemed  for  a  moment  that  the  Germans  would  take  Verdun 
as  she  had  taken  Antwerp  and  Warsaw.  The.railroad  com- 
munications with  the  fortress  were  largely  cut,  and  there 
was  no  small  danger  that  a  French  army  with  all  its  stores 
and  cannon  might  be  trapped.  It  is  said  that  the  French 
military  authorities  resolved  to  abandon  the  position,  but 
for  sentimental  reasons  it  was  finally  decided  to  hold  on. 
Supplies  were  brought  in  by  a  wonderful  system  of  motor 
transport  hastily  arranged,  and  the  new  German  methods 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


557 


of  attack  were  countered  by  new  ways  of  defence.  The 
Germans  attacked  with  the  utmost  courage,  but  were  met 
with  an  unconquerable  bravery.  Other  strong  positions 
were  taken,  but  the  German  progress  now  was  very  slow. 
Month  after  month  through  the  spring  and  into  the  sum- 
mer the  fighting  went  on.  There  were  savage  struggles  in 
underground  passages,  and  scenes  of  slaughter  too  horrible 
to  describe.  Every  little  hill  in  the  neighborhood  was 
fought  over  and  soaked  with  blood.  Half  a  million  Ger- 
mans were  killed  and  wounded,  and  the  number  of  French- 
men was  perhaps  not  much  less.  In  July  the  Germans 
were  forced  to  slacken  their  efforts  because  of  danger 
threatening  elsewhere.  Later  on,  after  superb  artillery 
preparation,  the  French  retook  in  two  days  all  the  impor- 
tant positions  for  which  the  Germans  had  struggled  so 
long.  In  all  respects  the  attack  on  Verdun  was  a  great 
German  failure. 

The  Germans  had  been  forced  to  desist  because  at  last 
the  British  were  about  ready,  to  the  north.  July  1st,  the 
British  and  the  French,  making  the  kind  of  artillery  prep- 
aration which  now  preceded  all  great  attacks,  began  an 
offensive  to  break  through  the  German  lines.  For  days 
the  bombardment  continued,  and  the  distant  thunder  of 
the  cannon  could  be  heard  over  the  Channel,  in  England. 
The  attack  was  in  the  region  of  the  River  Somme,  and 
was  directed  at  the  towns  of  Bapaume  and  Peronne  and 
the  more  important  centers  of  St.  Quentin,  Cambrai,  and 
Laon  behind  them.  If  these  places  were  taken,  almost 
certainly  the  Germans  would  have  to  retreat  out  of  France. 
The  German  positions  were  immensely  strong.  There 
were  many  little  trenches  and  strong  little  forts  for  ma- 
chine gunners,  protected  in  front  by  tangles  of  thick  barbed 
wire.  Behind  them  were  deep  underground  places  of 
refuge,  extending  down  several  stories,  in  which  armies 
could  be  sheltered  while  the  great  shells  were  falling.  Un- 
less these  defences  were  largely  obliterated  beforehand,  the 


The   Battle 
of  the 
Somme, 
1916 


558  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

attacking  infantry  would  be  mown  down  by  machine  guns 
as  they  came  forward.  When  the  infantry  did  advance, 
the  French  at  once  reached  the  outskirts  of  Peronne,  but 
the  British,  more  strongly  opposed,  made  almost  no  pro- 
gress. Thereafter  all  through  the  summer,  the  armies 
were  locked  in  a  death  struggle,  the  Allies  slowly  advancing 
a  little,  but  suffering  fearful  losses,  and  the  Germans  losing 
almost  as  many.  The  autumn  rains  and  the  deep  mud 
put  an  end  to  the  offensive,  and  it  seemed  that  the  Allies 
had  got  almost  nothing.  They  had  taken  no  important 
town,  and  the  German  lines  were  nowhere  broken.  Ac- 
tually, howevier,  the  Germans  did  make  a  considerable 
retreat  in  the  following  spring,  and  they  now  knew  that 
England  and  France  were  not  ready  to  abandon  the  con- 
test, but  that  a  terrible  struggle  must  continue,  wearing 
down  the  strength  of  both  sides  until  one  or  the  other  gave 
up  through  exhaustion. 

Italy,  During  the  course  of  this  summer  the  hopes  of  the  Allies 

ussia,  j,^^  high  for  a  time.     In  May,  the  Austrians  attacked  the 

1916  *  Italians  from  the  Trentino,  but  after  some  success  they 
were  forced  to  desist.  Later  the  Italians  captured  Gorizia, 
and  made  great  progress  through  the  mountain  barrier 
and  on  the  way  to  Trieste.  The  Austrians  had  drawn 
back  because  in  June  the  Russians  under  General  Brusilov, 
making  their  last  great  effort,  completely  shattered  the 
Austrian  lines  in  the  east,  took  a,  vast  number  of  captives, 
and  pressed  on  so  far  that  only  strong  German  assistance, 
at  a  time  when  it  was  difficult  for  Germany  to  detach 
any  troops,  saved  the  Austrians  from  destruction.  The 
Russians  were  finally  halted,  but  the  position  of  the  Cen- 
tral Powers  now  seemed  so  dangerous  that  in  the  last  days 
of  August,  Rumania  joined  the  Allies.  Germany,  how- 
ever, was  still  enormously  strong.  The  Somnie  offensive 
was  soon  to  come  to  an  end,  and  the  Russians  had  not  only 
exhausted  their  strength  but  were  now  a  prey  to  traitors 
and  revolutionists,  and  were  soon  to  drop  out  of  the  war. 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


559 


Accordingly,  Rumania,  attacked  from  the  side  of  Bulgaria 
and  from  the  north  by  a  powerful  German  army,  was 
mostly  overrun,  and  crushed  almost  as  completely  as 
Servia  had  been  the  year  before. 

The  war  had  for  some  time  resolved  itself  into  a  deadlock 
between  Germany,  flushed  with  success  and  gorged  with 
conquests,  and  the  Allies  hoping  to  defeat  her  and  wrest 
away  what  she  had  taken.  It  was  evidently  to  be  a  con- 
test of  resources,  a  contest  in  which  time  and  attrition 
would  make  the  weaker  succumb.  The  best  judges  now 
thought  that  Germany  could  never  be  defeated  by  England 
and  France,  without  further  aid,  and  that  at  best  the  war 
must  end  in  a  draw.  But  the  Germans  now  undertook  to 
win  the  war  thoroughly  and  quickly  by  means  of  another 
device.  With  it,  they  came  near  to  success,  but  in  the 
end  it  brought  about  their  own  ruin. 

They  undertook  to  cut  the  communications  of  the  Allies 
and  starve  England  out,  sinking  all  ships  by  means  of  sub- 
marines. The  communications  of  the  Germans  were  on 
land.  If  ever  they  were  cut,  as  they  were  about  to  be 
when  the  war  ended,  Germany  would  be  defeated.  The 
most  vital  communications  of  the  Allies  were  by  sea. 
France  depended  on  Great  Britain,  and  the  people  of  the 
British  Isles  could  not  continue  the  war,  nay,  they  could 
only  feed  themselves  a  few  weeks,  when  they  were  no 
longer  able  to  bring  over  the  seas  their  food  and  their  raw 
materials.  Had  the  Germans  ever  been  able  to  defeat  the 
British  fleet,  they  would  have  quickly  won  the  war,  and 
won  it  completely;  but  this  they  were  never  able  to  do. 
Early  in  1915,  however,  the  Germans  began  using  their 
submarines  not  only  to  sink  warships,  which  was  legiti- 
mate, but  to  destroy  unarmed  vessels  as  well;  and  in  May 
of  that  year  the  giant  liner  Lusitania  was  sunk  and  great 
numbers  of  passengers,  including  many  Americans,  were 
drowned.  The  Germans  maintained  that  since  the  British 
were  trying  by  the  blockade  to  starve  them,  especially 


A  contest 
of  exhaus- 
tion 


Submarines 


560 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Sinking  of 

merchant 

ships 


Unrestricted 
submarine 
warfare, 
1917 


their  women  and  children,  and  force  them  to  submit,  it 
was  very  proper  for  them  to  retaliate,  and  try  to  blockade 
England,  starve  her  into  submission,  and  so  end  a  hideous 
war. 

This  contention  was  accepted  by  few  outside  of  Ger- 
many, since  in  accordance  with  past  usage  it  was  perfectly 
proper  for  Britain,  in  command  of  the  seas,  to  blockade 
Germany,  as  it  would  have  been  for  Germany  to  cut  off  Eng- 
land if  Germany's  warships  had  got  command  of  the  seas. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  had  gradually  come  to  be  one  of  the 
fundamental  maxims  of  procedure  at  sea,  that  no  ship 
should  be  sunk  without  saving  the  crew,  in  case  they  were 
willing  to  surrender;  but  it  was  soon  seen  that  usually  sub- 
marines sank  the  ships  without  warning,  and  that  they 
could  not,  because  of  their  small  size,  save  the  crews  if 
they  would.  Germans  declared  that  the  submarine  was 
a  new  weapon,  and  that  new  rules  were  applicable  to  it; 
but  all  over  the  world  public  sentiment  ran  strongly  against 
the  use  of  a  weapon  which  could  not,  from  its  nature,  be 
used  in  accordance  with  primary  principles  of  humanity 
and  mercy. 

None  the  less  the  Germans  used  this  device  increasingly, 
hampered  somewhat  by  the  protests  of  neutrals  and  some- 
what more  by  various  devices  which  the  Allied  navies  em- 
ployed. But  they  paid  little  attention  to  protests  and 
largely  avoided  the  devices.  Presently  the  menace  be- 
came very  grave.  Great  Britain  went  into  the  war  with 
an  enormous  shipping  tonnage,  but  month  after  month 
vessels  carrying  supplies  were  sunk  by  submarines,  until 
not  only  the  great  loss  of  money  and  materials  was  felt 
severely,  but  presently  it  was  necessary  to  restrict  imports, 
since  the  war  greatly  increased  the  demands  upon  her 
merchant  marine  at  the  same  time  that  the  underwater 
boats  were  sinking  so  many  ships.  Germany  still  hesitated 
to  put  forth  her  full  effort  in  this  manner,  but  by  the  end 
of  1916,  when  the  strain  of  the  contest  had  begun  to  tell 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


561 


terribly  on  both  sides,  it  was  evident  that  if  the  sinking  of 
Allied  vessels  continued  at  the  rate  that  then  prevailed* 
Great  Britain  must  after  some  time  be  forced  out  of  the 
war,  and  that  if  the  rate  of  destruction  could  be  greatly 
increased,  the  end  might  come  very  quickly.  The  princi- 
pal obstacle  was  that  the  people  and  government  of  the 
United  States  were  strongly  opposed,  and  might  conceiv- 
ably be  brought  into  the  war  against  the  German  Empire. 
After  much  hesitation  the  choice  was  made,  and  January 
31,  1917,  the  Imperial  Government  announced  that  it 
would  begin  unrestricted  submarine  warfare.  The  Ger- 
man people  believed  that  Britain  would  be  starved  within 
a  few  months. 

This  year,  1917,  was  for  the  Allies  a  year  of  despair  and 
disaster.  When  the  weather  permitted,  the  British  and  the 
French  began  another  offensive,  to  try  again  to  break 
asunder  the  German  lines.  The  Allies  were  hampered  by 
the  German  retreat  which  had  left  an  area  of  terrible 
desolation  over  which  an  attack  could  not  v/ell  be  made; 
but  in  April  the  British  took  the  immensely  strong  position 
of  Vimy  and  in  June,  with  a  huge  explosive  charge,  they 
blew  up  the  supposedly  impregnable  position  of  Messines. 
Farther  north  they  desperately  strove  to  break  down  into 
the  plain  of  Flanders  and  compel  the  evacuation  of  the 
seaports  of  Belgium  whence  the  submarines  constantly 
issued.  They  seemed  to  have  good  chance  of  success;  but 
they  fought  with  a  fatal  ill  fortune  and  when  the  season 
came  to  an  end  they  had  endured  fearful  losses  and  taken 
from  the  Germans  nothing  that  compelled  an  important 
retreat.  During  the  summer  the  French  made  another 
effort  to  shatter  the  German  lines.  Near  Laon  they  broke 
through  the  Chemin  des  Dames  positions,  and  gained  a 
brilliant  local  victory;  but  because  of  terrible  losses,  gave 
up  the  effort  before  anything  decisive  was  accomplished. 
Later  events  were  to  show  that  this  was  the  last  great 
offensive   effort  the  French  could  make  by  themselves. 


A  year  of 

disaster, 

1917 


The 
fail 


British 


The  French 
exhausted 


562 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

collapse 
of  Russia 


The 

Russian 
Revolution, 
1917 


They  had  long  borne  the  brunt  of  the  war,  and  their  losses 
had  been  so  appalling  that  they  were  now  almost  at  the 
point  of  despair.  That  they  did  not  falter  and  accept  a 
German  peace,  as  traitors  urged,  was  due  to  the  efforts  of 
their  great  man  Clemenceau,  and  most  of  all  to  their  own 
unconquerable  spirit. 

If  there  was  failure  in  the  west,  there  was  complete 
downfall  in  the  east.  Russia  now  dropped  out  of  the  war. 
A  great  agricultural  state,  with  comparatively  few  rail- 
roads and  scanty  industrial  development,  her  people,  how- 
ever brave,  were  not  able  unaided  to  carry  on  for  a  long 
time  a  great  modern  war.  The  Russian  soldiers  fought 
with  a  courage  that  should  be  remembered  for  a  long  time. 
At  first  they  won  great  victories,  and,  it  may  be,  saved  the 
Allied  cause;  but  presently  their  trained  oflScers  were 
mostly  gone  and  they  had  no  reserve,  while  worst  of  all, 
most  of  their  equipment  was  lost  or  worn  out,  and  they 
could  no  longer  get  enough  of  the  machine  guns  and  wire, 
cannon  and  shells,  without  which  no  war  can  now  be 
conducted.  Their  government  was  ineflScient  and  corrupt; 
constantly  military  plans  were  betrayed  to  the  German 
spies.  And  yet  the  Russians  fought  on  beyond  expecta- 
tion. Again  and  again  the  simple  peasants  laid  down  their 
lives  in  hopeless  attacks.  Without  artillery  preparation 
they  went  forth  against  the  enemy  lines,  torn  by  heavy 
shells  from  a  distance,  then  scattered  by  the  light  artillery, 
riddled  by  machine-gun  fire  nearer  at  hand,  and  played 
upon  with  liquid  fire  as  they  atacked  the  entrenchments. 
Meanwhile  the  entire  industrial  and  economic  life  of 
the  country  was  disorganized.  It  was  as  if  an  entire 
nation,  long  suffering  some  grievous  malady,  had  suffered 
near  to  the  extreme  of  endurance,  and  was  approaching  to 
dissolution.  The  end  came  now.  The  government,  ah 
autocracy,  efficient  formerly  in  holding  down  its  people, 
was  overthrown.  For  a  while  it  was  hoped  that  under  a 
new  and  liberal  government  Russia  might  become  strong 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


563 


again,  and  take  an  important  part  in  the  war.  But 
actually  the  people  would  endure  no  more,  and  they  fell 
a  prey  to  visionaries  and  radicals,  who  wished  to  establish 
in  the  distracted  country  new  systems  which  had  never 
before  existed  except  in  the  minds  of  theorists  and  writers. 
Under  the  Bolshevihi,  Russia  withdrew  from  the  war.  In 
March  of  the  following  year,  1918,  they  signed  the  terrible 
Peace  of  Brest-Litovsk,  by  which  Russia  was  dismembered, 
and  cut  off  from  the  sea.  They  now  applied  themselves 
to  the  establishment  of  the  extremest  socialism,  seeming  to 
care  little  for  the  fact  that  Russia  had  lost  by  the  treaty 
what  her  great  leaders  had  striven  for  ages  to  gain.  At 
last  the  Germans  were  completely  free  in  the  east,  and 
could  devote  all  of  their  strength  to  one  more  crushing 
blow  in  the  west. 

In  October  1917  there  was  a  foretaste  of  what  they  could 
do  when  Italy  was  struck  and  almost  destroyed  at  a  blow. 
The  Italians  had  had  considerable  success,  but  the  Aus- 
trians,  reinforced  by  Germans,  now  massed  against  them, 
and,  corrupting  some  of  the  discontented  soldiers  and  thus 
making  a  weak  point  in  the  line,  suddenly  attacked  with 
overwhelming  numbers  and  with  the  fearful  "mustard 
gas."  They  burst  completely  through,  utterly  defeat- 
ing the  Italians.  The  result  of  this  battle  of  Caporetto 
was  that  a  large  part  of  the  Italian  army  was  captured  and 
half  of  their  artillery.  The  Teutonic  armies  did  not  stop 
until  they  were  nearly  in  sight  of  Venice;  but  then  the 
Italians  rallied  with  the  courage  of  despair,  and  by  a  mag- 
nificent effort  finally  saved  their  country  -by  standing  along 
the  little  river  Piave.  None  the  less,  Italy  was  now  thor- 
oughly discouraged,  and  almost  persuaded  to  abandon 
the  struggle. 

But  more  terrible  than  any  of  these  things  was  the  havoc 
wrought  by  submarines.  In  February,  1917,  800,000  tons 
of  shipping  were  destroyed,  and  the  Mediterranean  and  the 
waters  about  the  British  Isles  became  a  veritable  grave- 


The     Treaty 
of  Brest- 
Litovsk,  1918 


Caporetto, 
1917 


Destruction 
of  shipping 


564 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  United 
States    joins 
the  Allies 


German 
methods 
in  war 


yard  of  ships.  If  destruction  at  this  rate  could  be  con- 
tinued, then  there  was  no  doubt  that  the  cause  of  the  Allies 
was  doomed. 

Against  all  this  was  to  be  set  one  great  factor,  that  the 
United  States  had  entered  the  conflict  against  Germany 
and  her  partners.  When  the  Great  War  broke  out  most 
Americans  understood  little  about  the  causes  or  issues  of 
the  struggle,  and  nearly  all  of  them  dreaded  foreign  com- 
plications and  hated  the  thought  pf  a  war.  But  in  less 
than  three  years  the  great  majority  had  changed  pro- 
foundly, and  by  the  beginning  of  1917  willingly  followed 
their  leader  into  the  contest.  There  were  several  reasons 
for  this.  From  the  beginning  people  were  struck  with 
horror  at  the  methods  which  the  Germans  employed.  In 
Servia,  in  Poland,  in  Belgium,  and  in  France,  they  did 
harsh  and  terrible  things.  Civilians,  including  even 
women  and  children,  were  shot  down,  hostages  were  seized, 
ruinous  fines  were  imposed  for  small  offences,  while  there 
were  such  plundering  and  such  wild  excess  on  the  part  of 
German  soldiers  that  evidently  much  of  it  was  being  done 
with  the  idea  of  organizing  terror  and  striking  into  the 
hearts  of  the  people  unreasoning  fear.  Many  of  the  deeds 
perpetrated  were  so  contrary  to  principles  of  humanity 
and  to  the  spirit  of  western  civilization,  that  at  first  the 
reports  concerning  them  were  not  believed;  but  soon  evi- 
dence accumulated  in  such  manner  that  it  was  no  longer 
possible  to  doubt  them.  For  an  alleged  offence,  never 
proved  and  probably  not  committed,  the  ancient  town  of 
Louvain  was  fired  and  a  large  part  of  it  bu^-ned  to  the 
ground.  The  German  Ambassador  in  Constantinople  de- 
clared that  if  necessary  the  entire  French  nation  would  be 
held  as  hostage  and  starved  to  death  in  order  to  make 
England  abandon  the  v/ar.  In  Belgium  the  Germans 
methodically  seized  all  the  resources  of  the  country,  cal- 
lously leaving  the  people  to  starve;  and  before  long  the 
Belgians  would  most  probably  have  died  of  hunger  had 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


565 


they  not  been  fed  by  the  charity  of  theiBritish,  the  French, 
and  the  people  of  the  United  States.  To  Poland  outside 
relief  could  not  come,  and  it  was  not  long  before  the  appal- 
ling conditions  there  had  caused  the  death  of  all  the  old 
people  and  most  of  the  children.  This  was  commenced 
not  when  the  Germans  themselves  were  starving,  but 
almost  at  the  beginning  of  the  war. 

The  Cathedral  of  Rheims,  one  of  the  supreme  examples 
of  Gothic  architecture  and  religious  art,  something  which 
had  been  loved  and  admired  for  centuries,  which  could 
not  be  replaced,  was  not  far  from  the  line  of  battle.  Be- 
cause, as  they  said,  it  was  used  by  the  French  as  an  obser- 
vation post,  the  Germans  deliberately  ruined  it  with  shells 
from  their  cannon.  From  the  very  beginning  the  great 
German  airships,  the  Zeppelins,  sailed  over  the  cities 
of  England  and  France,  dropping  high  explosives  with 
fearful  effect.  Some  military  advantage  was  procured, 
but  the  nature  of  these  air  raids  was  such  that  the 
bombs  were  more  apt  to  drop  upon  civilians  than  upon 
fortifications.  In  the  same  way  German  warships  dashed 
out  when  they  could  and  bombarded  defenceless  coast 
towns.  The  aversion  with  which  all  this  was  regarded 
was  enhanced  by  terrible  stories  which  came  back  of  the 
way  prisoners  in  Germany  were  starved  and  abused;  while 
the  spectacle,  constantly  more  frequent,  of  men,  and 
even  women  and  children,  being  drowned  at  sea,  in- 
creased sympathy  for  the  Allies  and  horror  and  repulsion 
for  Germany.  Finally,  nothing  did  more  to  prejudice 
neutral  opinion  from  the  start  than  the  callous  man- 
ner in  which  the  rights  of  Belgium  were  treated  as  "a 
scrap  of  paper,"  and  that  unhappy  country  trampled  in 
the  dust. 

These  were  the  things  which  gradually  swayed  the 
feelings  of  the  mass  of  the  people  in  the  United  States  and 
elsewhere.  But  with  the  leaders  there  were  considerations 
still  more  important.     It  was  felt  instinctively,  and  it  was 


Frightful- 
ness  in  war 


Danger  to 

American 

ideals 


566 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Dangerous 
for    America 
to   remain 
out  of  the 
war 


America's 
time  of  prep- 
aration 


realized  more  and  more  clearly,  that  the  people  of  France 
and  England  stood  for  much  the  same  things  that  Amer- 
icans did,  and  that  the  Germans  represented  a  different 
system.  Evidently  there  was  now  going  on  in  Europe  a 
death  struggle  between  the  two.  If  the  ideals  of  democ- 
racy, individualism,  and  personal  liberty  went  down  to 
destruction  across  the  Atlantic,  they  would  afterward 
most  probably  be  in  grave  danger  in  the  United  States. 
In  the  opinion  of  many,  the  American  people  would  later 
on  in  that  case  have  to  fight  against  German  encroachment 
even  as  the  people  of  France  and  England  now  were  doing. 
By  the  beginning  of  1917  it  began  to  seem  that  Allied  vic- 
tory was  not  to  be  hoped  for.  Therefore,  every  considera- 
tion of  prudence  seemed  to  dictate  that  Americans  join 
in  the  war  and  fight  along  with  their  friends,  rather  than 
later  on  fight  alone  against  a  mightier,  triumphant  German 
Empire.  These  feelings  became  constantly  stronger,  and  at 
last  many  people  felt  that  it  was  not  only  shameful  but  very 
dangerous  for  the  United  States  to  be  neutral  any  longer. 
Early  in  1917,  when  the  German  Ambassador  delivered  his 
note  announcing  unrestricted  submarine  warfare.  Presi- 
dent Wilson  advised  that  relations  be  severed  with  Ger- 
many and  that  assistance  be  given  to  the  Allies  with  all 
of  America's  resources.  April  6,  1917,  the  United  States 
declared  war.  It  was  one  of  the  most  momentous  events 
in  the  history  of  the  American  people,  and  it  was  destined 
to  determine  the  issue  of  the  struggle 

America,  and  America  alone,  could,  indeed  supply  the 
mighty  resources  needed  to  defeat  the  Germans.  The 
Germans  had  not  only  the  ad\'antage  of  position  and  the 
shorter  lines,  but  greater  resources  in  iron  and  coal,  and 
hence  in  munitions  of  war.  But  with  the  accession  of  the 
United  States  the  Allies  again  became  definitely  superior 
in  these  basic  resources,  and  if  only  there  was  still  enough 
time  and  if  only  they  did  not  lose  heart  and  give  up  the 
struggle,  victory  would  almost  certainly  be  theirs.     At 


THE  GREAT  WAR  567 

first,  however,  it  seemed  that  there  might  not  be  time  for 
the  United  States  to  assemble  her  resources  and  bring 
them  to  bear  in  Europe;  that  she  had,  indeed,  entered  the 
struggle  too  late.  It  had  taken  England  two  years  to 
bring  her  great  strength  to  bear;  it  would  probably  take  the 
Americans  as  long.  They  did  begin  with  an  energy  and 
immensity  of  effort  that  left  no  doubt  that  they  had  re- 
solved to  give  themselves  utterly  to  the  task,  but  through- 
out 1917,  while  the  Allies  were  meeting  with  such  disaster 
in  Europe,  the  work  of  the  United  States  was  almost  en- 
tirely preparation.  Great  armies  were  raised  by  compul- 
sory service,  the  making  of  rifles,  cannon,  shells,  and  ships 
was  begun  on  an  unheard-of  scale,  but  nothing  would  be 
ready  for  some  time.  Meanwhile  the  Germans  hoped  to 
win  the  war  by  means  of  their  submarines  or  else  by  one 
more  great  stroke  in  the  west. 

By  the  beginning  of  1918  they  had  pretty  definitely  The 
failed  in  the  first.  No  one  device  was  ever  found  for  dis-  submarines 
posing  of  the  submarines,  but  gradually  they  were  subdued. 
The  protection  of  warships  had  long  since  been  effected  by 
putting  around  them  a  screen  of  fast  moving  destroyers. 
As  soon  as  the  United  States  entered  the  war  her  navy 
joined  in  the  work.  The  naval  superiority  of  the  Allies 
was  for  the  first  time  beyond  all  question,  and  the  addition 
of  the  American  destroyers  made  it  possible  to  protect 
"convoys"  of  merchant  ships  also.  The  rate  of  destruc- 
tion was  now  much  diminished.  Moreover,  a  new  and 
terrible  device  was  employed  with  increasing  success:  the 
depth  bomb,  which  exploded  beneath  the  water  with  fear- 
ful effect.  Furthermore  a  vast  barrage  of  mines  was 
laid  in  the  North  Sea,  hindering  the  exit  of  the  German 
submarines;  and  in  1918  the  British,  in  daring  raids,  suc- 
ceeded in  partly  blocking  the  Belgian  harbors  out  of  which 
the  submarines  came.  Altogether  the  submarines  became 
less  and  less  effective,  and  while  they  continued  to  be 
a  serious  menace  until  the  end  of  the  war,  yet  by  the 


checked 


568 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Exhaustion 
near 


Great 

German 
attack,  1918 


beginning  of  1918  the  Germans  could  no  longer  hope  to  win 
solely  by  them. 

Thus  the  Allies  would  have  time,  and  time  was  now  on 
their  side.  There  might  still  be  a  long  and  costly  war,  if 
the  Germans  stood  on  the  defensive  and  fought  with  the 
protection  of  their  fortified  lines;  though  if  the  attack  were 
pushed  resolutely  their  ultimate  defeat  was  certain.  On 
the  other  hand,  if  they  could  strike  on  the  west  front  before 
American  aid  arrived,  it  might  be  that  victory  would  still 
be  theirs.  This  chance  they  resolved  to  take,  and  all 
through  the  winter  of  1917-18  there  was  a  constant 
movement  of  troops  and  guns  from  the  east  to  the  west. 
Russia  was  completely  broken,  and  only  such  forces  were 
left  there  as  were  needed  to  guard  the  conquests  and  get 
such  supplies  as  that  ruined  land  could  furnish.  In  truth 
the  war  had  reached  the  stage  where  all  the  contestants 
were  nearly  exhausted.  Italy  was  recovering  from  the 
defeat  of  Caporetto,  but  she  was  profoundly  discouraged. 
France  had  lost  a  great  part  of  all  her  young  men,  and 
Frenchmen,  though  unwilling  to  yield,  were  beginning  to 
despair  of  ever  defeating  the  foe.  Britain  also  was  nearly 
sunk  beneath  the  burdens  which  she  bore,  and  the  fearful 
fighting  of  1917  had  greatly  depleted  her  armies  in  France. 
On  the  other  side,  Austria  was  at  her  last  gasp  and  able 
to  do  little  more.  Germany,  with  all  her  immense  strength 
organized  for  the  war,  might  fight  on  for  some  time,  per- 
haps, and  by  a  sudden  blow  might  even  conquer,  but  if  she 
struck  the  blow  and  failed,  then,  as  after-events  were  to 
show,  all  her  power  would  go  down  at  once  into  ruin. 

As  Napoleon  had  once  done,  her  leaders  resolved  to  stake 
all  on  one  last  stroke.  In  the  spring  of  1918  she  took  the 
offensive  and  struck  out  with  a  blow  like  unloosing  the 
forces  of  hell.  March  21st,  the  Germans  attacked  from  St. 
Quentin,  at  a  point  where  the  British  had  recently  taken 
over  the  lines  from  the  French.  A  heavy  mist  enabled  the 
enemy  to  surprise  them.     Shells  from  the  great  guns  fell 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


569 


far  behind  the  front  lines,  while  light  cannon  and  countless 
machine  guns  were  brought  forward  by  the  attackers. 
The  British  were  beaten  as  never  before  during  the  war, 
and  for  the  first  time  on  the  western  front  fortified  lines 
were  broken  completely  through.  The  German  plan  had 
been  to  separate  the  French  from  the  British,  and  drive 
the  British  back  upon  the  Channel  where  they  could  have 
beeli  destroyed;  but  to  the  north,  about  Arras,  the  lines 
held  so  fast  that  this  failed.  None  the  less,  the  Germans 
had  broken  clear  through,  and  when  at  last  their  advance 
was  arrested,  they  had  gone  more  than  thirty  miles,  up 
to  the  outskirts  of  the  all-important  railroad  center  of 
Amiens.  Scarcely  had  the  fighting  died  down  when  an- 
other fearful  blow  was  struck  farther  north.  The  lines 
were  raked  with  shells  and  every  position  drenched  with 
gasses.  In  Armentieres  the  streets  ran  with  the  liquid 
of  mustard  gas.  An  overwhelming  force  was  thrown 
against  the  British  again,  and  they  were  driven  back  so  far 
that  their  commander  told  them  they  were  fighting  with 
** backs  to  the  wall."  But  they  fought  as  the  British  usu- 
ally do  fight,  and  with  some  aid  from  the  French  held  on 
and  barred  the  way  to  the  Channel.  This  was  in  April. 
In  May  came  the  third  phase  of  the  German  offensive, 
this  time  against  the  French  lines.  In  one  great  rush  they 
went  through  the  position  of  Chemin  des  Dames,  and,  pierc- 
ing far  through  the  lines,  rushed  on  until  once  more  they 
came  to  the  Marne.  It  was  evident  that  the  crisis  of  the 
war  had  come.  If  the  Germans  could,  from  the  positions 
which  they  had  taken,  strike  out  again  with  the  same  suc- 
cess, they  might  next  time  get  as  far  as  Paris.  Under  stress 
of  the  fearful  peril  all  the  Allied  armies  were  at  last  put  un- 
der one  command,  under  the  great  French  General  Foch, 
and  cries  went  out  to  the  United  States  to  hasten  her  succor. 
The  Americans  had  made  giant  strides  in  their  prep- 
arations, but  the  best  judges  abroad  did  not  expect  them 
to  be  ready  yet.    Now,  however,  the  need  was  so  great 


The   Battle 
of  Picardy 


America 
answers 
the  call 


570 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Last    effort 
of  the 
Germans: 
second 
battle  of  the 
Marne 


Allies   begin 
an  offensive 


that  they  were  asked  to  send  across  armies  not  entirely 
ready.  This  was  done.  The  British  furnished  most  of 
the  shipping  from  their  own  diminished  stock,  and  pro- 
tected by  warships  from  the  submarines,  there  now  began 
across  the  ocean  a  movement  of  men  such  as  had  never 
been  seen  before  in  the  world.  Early  in  July  there  were 
a  million  American  soldiers  in  France,  and  they  were  now 
coming  at  the  rate  of  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  million  each 
month.  And  more  than  that,  as  they  were  tried,  at  first 
in  very  small  operations,  they  bore  themselves  so  well  as 
to  give  much  hope  for  the  future.  Evidently  there  was 
not  much  more  time  for  the  Germans  before  the  weight 
of  America  would  be  felt.  Twice  more  did  the  Germans 
strike,  with  less  success  than  before.  Then  July  14th  their 
last  oflFensive  was  undertaken.  Between  Rheims  and 
Chateau-Thierry  the  attack  was  made  and  an  effort  made 
to  cross  the  Marne  and  open  the  road  to  Paris.  But  the 
German  plans  had  become  known,  and  the  French,  giving 
ground  a  little,  smothered  the  abandoned  positions  in  a 
whirlwind  of  fire.  After  terrible  losses  the  Germans 
were  brought  completely  to  a  stand. 

Four  days  later,  July  18th,  Marshal  Foch  began  a  great 
Allied  offensive.  The  assistance  from  the  United  States 
had  enabled  him  to  establish  a  reserve  and  again  assemble 
an  "army  of  maneuver."  The  Germans  had  driven  three 
salients  into  his  line,  and  in  these  salients  they  had  the 
inner  position  and  the  short  lines,  but  between  the  two 
greater  salients,  in  the  region  fromMontdidier  to  Soissons, 
the  Allies  had  the  same  advantage.  Accordingly  it  was 
from  this  part  of  the  line  that  the  Allied  offensive  began. 
A  sudden  attack  by  French  troops  and  some  Americans 
nearly  captured  Soissons,  and  threatened  with  gravest 
peril  the  German  forces  under  the  Crown  Prince.  After 
many  days  of  desperate  fighting  these  forces  were  extri- 
cated, but  with  heavy  losses  and  after  abandoning  what 
they  had  taken  in  the  successful  stroke  that  had  brought 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


571 


them  down  to  the  Marne.  Meanwhile,  August  8th,  the 
British  struck  out  at  Montdidier,  at  the  side  of  the  salient 
to  the  north,  and,  capturing  many  prisoners  and  many 
important  places,  retook  what  they  had  lost  in  the  disaster 
of  March.  During  the  same  time  the  Germans  abandoned? 
without  fighting,  the  blood-soaked  positions  captured  at 
such  terrible  cost  when  they  tried  to  break  through  to  the 
Channel.  By  the  end  of  August,  therefore,  the  great  dan- 
ger was  past,  and  the  Germans  had  definitely  lost  the 
offensive. 

Marshal  Foch  resolved  to  continue  the  attack,  and  the 
fighting  went  on  without  any  cessation.  September  13th, 
in  their  first  large  operation,  the  Americans  wiped  out  the 
St.  Mihiel  salient  which  the  Germans  had  driven  to  the 
south  of  Verdun  in  the  early  weeks  of  the  war.  A  fort- 
night later  a  large  American  army  began  fighting  to  clear 
the  Argonne  Forest,  which  was  the  great  buttress  of  the 
German  positions  in  the  south,  and  which  protected  one 
of  their  all-important  lines  of  rail  communication.  In  the 
center  the  French  did  not  press  the  attack  upon  the  im- 
pregnable positions  about  Laon,  but  in  the  north  the  Brit-' 
ish  with  some  Americans  and  some  Belgians,  tried  to  smash 
through  the  Hindenburg  Line  in  one  place  and  break  down 
into  Flanders  in  another.  It  was  the  Germans  who  were 
now  with  their  backs  to  the  wall. 

The  failing  German  fortunes  were  accompanied  by  col- 
lapse everywhere  else.  The  army  which  in  October  1915 
had  landed  at  Salonica  had  never  accomplished  anything, 
largely  because  it  could  not  be  strongly  reinforced  and 
because  the  submarines  constantly  harassed  its  communi- 
cation line.  But  now,  in  September  1918,  it  suddenly  fell 
upon  the  Bulgars,  broke  through  their  positions,  and  in  a 
few  days  the  Servians  were  back  once  more  in  their  coun- 
try, and  the  Allies  were  threatening  the  Bulgarian  plain. 
By  the  end  of  the  month  Bulgaria  had  signed  an  armistice 
equivalent   to  complete  surrender.    Turkey,  long  since 


Great 
assault  on 
the   German 
lines 


Germany*s 

allies 

surrender 


672 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Austria 
collapses 


The 

Germans 
completely 
defeated 


The    British 
break  the 
Hindenburg 
Line  ^ 


exhausted,  and  just  defeated  in  Asia  by  the  British,  was 
now  in  a  hopeless  position,  and  her  surrender  soon  fol- 
lowed. This  brought  to  an  end  the  German  dream  of  dom- 
ination in  the  Balkans  and  the  founding  of  a  great  "Middle 
Europe."  In  October  the  Austrians,  urged  on  by  the 
Germans  but  with  almost  no  power  left,  attacked  the 
Italians,  failed  completely,  and  then,  struck  by  the  Italian 
armies,  suffered  the  greatest  disaster  of  the  war.  The 
entire  Austrian  forces  surrendered  or  fled  as  disorganized 
rabble,  abandoning  their  stores  and  cannon;  and  in  a  few 
days  the  Italians  were  through  the  mountains  at  last,  at 
Trieste,  in  the  Trentino,  and  on  the  march  for  Vienna. 
November  4th,  Austria-Hungary  surrendered,  and  gave  up 
the  war. 

While  these  disasters  were  ruining  the  German  cause, 
they  were  fighting  the  last  of  their  battles .  Steadily  through 
the  tangled  thickets,  the  rocks,  and  the  mazes  of  barbed 
wire  of  the  Argonne,  the  new  American  army  was  striking 
the  inferior  German  force,  and  though  their  losses  were 
very  heavy,  they  advanced  steadily,  capturing  positions 
deemed  impregnable  hitherto,  and  presently  getting  the 
main  railway  line,  the  vital  line  of  German  communica- 
tions, under  the  fire  of  their  great  guns.  If  this  line  were 
cut,  a  large  part  of  the  German  army  might  be  forced  to 
surrender.  To  the  north  the  British  and  their  comrades, 
with  as  splendid  dash  as  was  ever  seen  during  the  war, 
broke  at  last  all  through  the  Hindenburg  Line,  with  its 
wide  trenches,  its  deep  underground  fortifications,  its 
labyrinths  of  barbed  wire,  and  its  thousands  of  machine- 
gun  emplacements.  Here  the  courage  of  the  British  sol- 
dier was  aided  by  the  "tanks"  or  small  moving  fortresses, 
which  the  British  had  first  used  in  the  Somme  offensive  of 
1916,  and  which  at  last  solved  the  problem  of  breaking  the 
systems  of  entrenchments.  Mbreoyer,  they  now  broke 
through  in  Belgium,  and  occupied  the  coast  with  its  sub- 
marine bases.     Then  turning  south  they  began  to  threaten 


THE  GREAT  WAR 


573 


the  other  great  artery  of  German  rail  communications, 
the  trunk  line  from  Paris  to  Berlin,  which  goes  through  the 
valley  of  the  Meuse,  by  Namur  and  Liege.  If  this  were 
cut,  and  if  the  Americans  cut  the  other  line  in  the  south, 
then  the  Germans  might  be  forced  to  surrender  on  the  field 
or  else  save  themselves  only  by  a  flight  like  that  of  the 
Austrian  armies. 

The  German  soldiers,  so  wonderful  in  the  days  of  suc- 
cess, began  to  waver  now,  and  disaffection  and  despair 
increased  among  the  German  people.  They  had  been 
slowly  starved  by  the  blockade,  and  after  staking  all,  they 
had  lost.  The  men  of  the  navy,  ordered  to  dash  out  for  a 
last  effort,  mutinied.  The  end  was  at  hand;  the  author- 
ities asked  for  an  armistice.  When  the  conditions  were 
announced,  they  were  terrible  enough:  not  only  must  the 
Germans  at  once  evacuate  France,  Belgium,  and  their 
other  conquests,  but  they  must  abandon  Alsace-Lorraine, 
and  withdraw  behind  the  Rhine,  leaving  the  bridgehead 
fortresses  to  the  Allies,  and  leaving  their  richest  industrial 
district.  They  must  surrender  their  fleet  and  their  sub- 
marines, disband  their  army  and  give  up  most  of  their 
military  equipment.  It  was  evident  at  once  that  the  ac- 
ceptance of  such  terms  would  mean  the  end  of  the  war. 
November  9th,  the  German  Emperor  abdicated  his  throne 
and  fled  to  Holland.  Two  days  later,  November  11th, 
German  emissaries  signed  the  Armistice  terms. 


Germany 
asks  for  an 
armistice 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


General  accounts:  for  brief  narratives,  C.  J.  H.  Hayes,  A  ^ 
Brief  History  of  the  Great  War  (1920);  A.  F.  Pollard,  A  Short  ^ 
History  of  the  Great  War  (1920) ;  D.  W.  Johnson,  Topography  and 
Strategy  in  the  War  (1917);  longer  accounts  are  John  Buchan, 
Nelson* s  History  of  the  War  (1915 — ) ;  F.  H.  Simonds,  The  History 
of  the  World  Wary  volumes  I-IV  (1914-19),  perhaps  the  best  of 
the  longer,  non-technical  accounts.  Several  periodical  histories 
were  undertaken  by  great  metropolitan  journals;  London  Times 
History  of  the  War,  Manchester  ^Guardian  History  of  the  War, 


574  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

New  York  Times  CurretU  History  of  the  War^  voluminous  and 
discursive,  but  with  a  vast  amount  of  interesting  information. 
Of  the  longer  histories  the  most  important  are  the  British  oflScial 
History  of  the  Great  War,  Based  on  Official  Documents  (1920 — ) 
Guerre  de  191^}  Documents  Offi^lSy  Textes  LSgislaiifs  et  Regie- 
merUaires  (1914 — ),  official  publication  of  the  French  govern- 
ment; Der  Grosse  Krieg  in  Einzeldarstellungeny  published  by  the 
late  German  Great  General  Staff. 

Accounts  by  principal  commanders :  General  Erich  von  Falk- 
enhayn,  trans.  General  HeadquarterSy  191Jf-1916y  and  Its  Critical 
Decisicms  (1919);  Field  Marshal  Viscount  French,  1914  (1919); 
General  Basil  Gourko,  Memories  and  Impressions  of  War  and 
Revolution  in  Russia,  191^.-1917  (1918);  Sir  Douglas  Haig*s 
Despatches  {December,  1915-April,  1919),  edited  by  Lieut.-Col. 
J.  H.  Boraston  (1919);  General  Erich  Ludendorff,  My  War 
Memories,  191^-1918,  %  vols.  (1919),  excellent  comments  on 
strategy  and  great  events  in  the  conflict. 

Particular  episodes  or  campaigns:  General-Major  Baum- 
garten-Crusius,  Die  Marneschlacht  (1919);  General  Berthaut, 
"L*Erreur**  de  1914^,  Reponse  aux  Critiques  (1919) ;  John  Buchan, 
The  Battle  of  the  Somme  (1917);  Louis  MadeUn,  La  Victoire  de 
la  Mame  (1916),  trans.,  perhaps  the  best  account  for  the  gen- 
eral reader;  John  Masefield,  Gallipoli  (1916);  Major-General 
Sir  F.  Maurice,  Forty  Days  in  1914  (1919);  [anonymous], 
Pourquoi  VAllemagne  a  CapituU  le  11  Novembre  1918  (1919), 
evidently  based  on  documents  in  possession  of  the  French  Gen- 
eral Headquarters;  G.  Prezzolini,  Caporetto  (1919);  Raymond 
Recouly,  Foch:  le  Vainqueur  de  la  Guerre  (1919);  Lieut.-Col. 
Rousset,  La  Bataille  de  VAisne  (Avril-Mai,  1917)  (1919),  for 
the  Nivelle  offensive;  Lieut.-Col.  de  Thomasson,  Le  Revers  de 
1914  et  Ses  Causes  (1919). 

The  war  on  the  sea:  Charles  Domville-Fife,  Submarines  and 
Sea  Power  (1919),  excellent;  Admiral  Lord  Jellicoe,  The  Grand 
Fleet,  1914-1916  (1918),  a  very  important  book;  Captain  L. 
Persius,  Der  Seekrieg  (1919) ;  Grand  Admiral  von  Tirpitz,  trans. 
My  Memoirs,  2  vols.  (1919). 

America  and  the  War:  Lindsay  Rogers,  Americans  Case 
against  Germany  (1917),  a  good  brief  account;  Diplomatic  Cor- 
respondence between  the  United  States  and  Germany,  August  1, 
1914- April  6,  1917,  edited  by  J.  B.  Scott  (1919);  Lieut.-Col. 
de  Chambrun  and  Captain  de  Marenches,  UArrrde  Amiricaine 
dans  le  Conflit  EuropSen  (1919). 


THE   GREAT  WAR  575 

German  practices  in  the  war:  Die  Deutsche  Kriegsfuhrung 
und  das  Volkerrecht  (1919),  a  German  oflficial  publication; 
Hugh  Gibson,  A  Journal  from  Our  Legation  in  Belgium  (1917) ; 
S.  S.  McClure,  Obstacles  to  Peace  (1917);  A.  J.  Toynbee,  The 
German  Terror  in  Belgium  (1917),  The  German  Terror  in  France 
(1917);  Brand  Whitlock,  Belgium:  a  Personal  Narrative,  2  vols. 
(1919),  excellent. 

Peace  proposals:  G.  L.  Dickinson,  Documents  and  Statements 
relating  to  Peaxie  Proposals  and  War  Aims  {December ,  1916- 
November,  1918)  (1919). 


The 

settlement 
after  the 
War 


Public 

interest  and 
expectations 


CHAPTER    XII 
^         THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920 

The  world  must  be  made  safe  for  democracy.    Its  peace  must  be 
planted  upon  the  tested  foundations  of  political  liberty. 
Address  of  the  President  to  the  Congress  of  the  United  States, 
AprU  2,  1917. 

The  idea  that  action  should  be  taken  after  this  war  to  secure  an  en- 
during peace  in  the  future.     ... 
Viscount  Bryce,  Essays  and  Addresses  in  War  Time  (1918)» 
p.  176. 

Not  since  Rome  punished  Carthage  for  Punic  faith  has  such  a  treaty 
been  written. 
New  York  Tribune,  May  8,  1919. 

When  the  Germans,  with  weariness  and  despair  at  home 
and  their  armies  crumbling  under  the  blows  of  the  Allies 
at  the  front,  surrendered  by  accepting  the  armistice,  it 
was  evident  that  an  old  era  in  the  history  of  the  western 
world  had  come  to  an  end,  and  that  the  leaders  of  the  na- 
tions must  assemble  and  settle  the  affairs  of  the  age  which 
had  been  and  prepare  for  the  new  order  which  was  coming. 
Several  times  had  this  happened  before  in  the  history 
of  Europe:  in  1648,  at  the  end  of  the  dreadful  Thirty 
Years'  War;  in  1713  and  1714,  after  the  long  War  of  the 
Spanish  Succession;  in  1814  and  1815,  after  Napoleon  and 
the  French  Revolution.  So  now  in  1919  the  greatest  of 
all  the  peace  conferences  was  opened  in  Paris. 

Never  had  a  peace  congress  assembled  in  the  midst  of 
such  great  and  unreasoning  expectations.  In  1648  and 
1713  the  great  mass  of  the  people  had  no  voice  in  govern- 
ment and  little  interest  in  what  the  government  did.     So 

676 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        577 

it  was  in  1814,  though  then  many  people  believed  that  a 
new  and  better  era  was  at  hand.  But  in  1919  the  people 
of  the  victorious  states  had  considerable  control  of  their 
governments;  most  of  the  population  could  read  and  write, 
and  had  followed  the  events  of  the  struggle  with  enormous 
interest.  Moreover,  whatever  the  original  aims  of  the 
contestants  may  have  been,  as  the  war  progressed  and 
became  a  contest  of  endurance  and  exhaustion,  so  that  it 
was  necessary  to  have  the  fullest^support  of  the  body  of 
the  people,  they  were  asked  to  throw  themselves  into  the 
struggle  so  that  the  world  might  be  made  "safe  for  democ- 
racy,"  and  war  might  be  brought  to  an  end.  Tlxfirywh^e 
the  masses  of  the  people,  the  simple  minded,  the  liberal, 
the  idealists,  yearned  for  these  things  and  believed  that 
they  would  shortly  be  brought  to  pass,  that  a  new  and 
better  world  was  about  to  be  brought  into  being. 

At  the  head  of  these  people  was  President  Wilson  of  the  President 
United  States,  the  greatest  idealist  of  his  time.  There  Wilson 
was  difference  of  opinion  about  the  wisdom  of  some  things 
which  he  did  before  America  entered  the  war,  and  also 
afterward,  but  there  could  be  no  doubt  about  the  loftiness 
and  purity  of  his  motives,  or  that  he  had  the  good  of  man- 
kind at  heart.  His  speeches  and  his  communications 
seemed  to  great  numbers  of  people  in  the  Allied  countries, 
and  perhaps  even  in  Germany  and  Austria,  to  express  the 
yearnings  of  their  hearts  for  better  things.  So  it  came 
about  that  at  the  end  of  the  war  he  had  for  a  short  while 
unparalleled  influence  among  multitudes  of  people  who 
trusted  with  pathetic  confidence  that  he  would  in  some 
way  bring  about  the  great  reforms  which  he  had  spoken 
of  so  finely.  Few  seemed  to  have  thought  of  the  diflSculty 
of  achieving  the  immense  improvements  now  suddenly  to 
be  made,  or  to  realize  that  some  of  these  things  were  old 
problems  that  had  baffled  mankind  for  ages. 

In  January  1918,  President  Wilson  had  outlined  "Four- 
teen Conditions"  of  what  he  regarded  as  a  proper  peace. 


578 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 

"Fourteen 

Points" 


Control  of 

foreign 

affairs 


"Freedom 
of  the  Seas" 


Russia  should  be  evacuated,  Belgium,  France,  Rumania, 
Servia,  and  Montenegro  evacuated  and  restored;  Alsace- 
Lorraine  should  be  returned  to  France;  the  Italian  frontier 
rectified;  a  free  Poland  should  be  established;  the  sub- 
ject peoples  of  Turkey  and  Austria-Hungary  be  given 
a  chance  for  autonomous  development;  and  impartial  ad- 
justment of  colonial  claims  should  be  made  with  considera- 
tion for  the  populations  involved.  He  then  entered  upon 
larger  and  more  difficult  matters:  there  must  be  "open 
covenants  of  peace,  openly  arrived  at";  no  more  private 
international  understandings;  "absolute  freedom  of  navi- 
gation upon  the  seas";  removal  of  economic  barriers ;\ 
guarantees  for  the  reduction  of  armaments;  and  "a  general 
association  of  nations"  under  specific  covenants  for  the 
purpose  of  maintaining  peace.  Some  of  these  provisions 
were  at  once  criticised  as  vague  or  impossible  of  fulfillment, 
but  they  were  accepted  by  multitudes  who  believed  them 
practicable  and  necessary  for  the  good  of  the  world.  ' 

Some  of  the  matters  proclaimed  did  present  enormous 
difficulty.  To  make  treaties  openly,  or  bring  diplomacy 
within  control  jpf  representatives  of  the  people  had  been 
much  desired  by  reformers  for  a  long  time  and  many  efforts 
had  been  made  to  obtain  it.  In  the  seventeenth  and  eigh- 
teenth centuries  the  English  House  of  Commons  had  re- 
peatedly tried  to  get  control  of  foreign  affairs,  and  when 
the  first  American  government  was  instituted  such  control 
was  given  to  Congress;  but  in  both  countries  it  was  pres- 
ently obvious  that  secrecy  was  necessary  for  the  proper 
conduct  of  foreign  relations,  and  that  such  business  could 
only  be  transacted  effectively  if  left  to  the  management  of 
a  small  number  of  men  experienced  and  expert. 

"Freedom  of  the.§eas"  was  a  cry  raised  by  the  Germans 
during  the  war,  and  from  them  taken  up  by  idealists  every- 
where who  believed  that  there  ought  not  to  be  any  mili- 
tarism or  force,  on  sea  or  on  land.  The  application  of 
such  a  doctrine  would  principally  affect  Great  Britain  and 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        579 


the  British  Empire.  Britain  had  won  her  wars  and  be- 
come great  through  power  on  the  sea.  But  it  was  gener- 
ally admitted  that  she  had  not  abused  this  power,  and  in 
time  of  peace  had  not  ff or  a  long  whil^  interfered  jwith 
other  nations  on  the  waters.  In  time  of  war  she  had  not 
seldom  exerted  her  sea  power  with  decisive  effect;  but  it 
was  owing  to  this  that  the  Allies  had  been  able  to  resist 
the  German  armies.  It  was  certain  that  the  BritislLpecqjle 
would  regard  any  attempt  to  deprive  them  of  it„as_  a  thrust 
at  thelLxery-fixistence. 

With  respect  to  what  was  being  called  a  "League  of 
Nations,"  a  long  line  of  men,  from  Henry  IV  of  France  and 
William  Penn  to  Tsar  Alexander  I  and  Tsar  Nicholas  II, 
had  hoped  for  such  a  thing;  and  many  a  plan  had  been 
suggested  for  it;  but  so  far  the  complexity  of  the  problem 
had  baffled  all  who  attempted  to  solve  it. 

The  Congress  of  Paris,  which  assembled  January  18, 
1919,  began  its  work  in  the  midst  of  prodigious  popular 
interest  and  expectations  which  no  assembly  could  have 
fulfilled.  Idealists,  jjacifistSj  humanitarians,  and  a  great 
number  of  others  who  were  enthusiastic  but  ill-informed, 
expected  such  a  settlement  of  the  affairs  of  the  world  that 
all  the  damage  done  by  the  war  would  be  amended,  yet 
nothing  taken  from  Austria-Hungary  and  the  German 
Empire;  that  the  Allies  would  be  made  content,  yet  the 
^entral  Powers  not  offended;  that  reparation  should  be 
made,  yet  no  indemnities  taken;  that  self-determination 
of  peoples  would  be  recognized,  yet  Germany  and  Austria 
not  be  shorn  of  their  possessions;  that  open  diplomacy 
would  be  established,  democracy  and  the  welfare  of  the 
masses;  that  there  would  be  freedom  of  the  seas,  no  more 
war,  and  a  League  of  Nations  with  good  feeling  and  the 
brotherhood  of  man.  On  the  other  hand  a  smaller  num- 
ber, though  not  a  few,  with  better  knowledge  of  affairs  and 
of  what  had  been  done  in  the  past,  predicted  that  some  of 
the  proposals  current  were  irreconcilable  and  others  im- 


The  League 
of  Nations 


The 

Congress 
of  Paris, 
1919 


580 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


possible  of  accomplishment;  and  that  with  respect  to  the 
grander  and  more  general  schemes  the  utmost  possible  was 
for  the  best  men  to  try  earnestly  and  in  good  faith  to  solve 
some  part  of  the  difficulties  which  had  remained  insoluble 
so  long. 

From  the  countries  which  had  participated  in  the  war 
against  the  Central  Powers  came  delegates  to  the  Confer- 
ence at  Paris.  Neither  Germany  nor  her  allies  were  to 
take  part  in  the  discussion  or  the  framing  of  the  treaties, 
which,  when  ready,  were  to  be  submitted  merely  for  ap- 
proval or  rejection^ 

The  great  decisions  were  not  arrived  at  openly  or  with 
the  knowledge  of  all  of  the  Conference.  Important  affairs 
were  first  decided  by  the  representatives  of  the  four  great- 
est powers,  the  British  Empire,  France,  Italy  and  the 
United  States,  and  sometimes  Japan;  after  which  they 
were  made  known  to  the  other  members  of  the  Congress. 
Actually  the  principal  work  was  always  in  the  hands  of 
Mr.  Lloyd  George,  M.  Clemenceau,  and  Signor  Orlando — 
prime  ministers  respectively  of  the  United  Kingdom, 
France,  and  Italy — and  of  President  Wilson.  The  question 
of  the  freedom  of  the  seas  was  soon  dropped,  and  wisely,  as 
competent  critics  had  hoped  and  predicted  beforehand. 
With  respect  to  the  reduction  of  armamen  ts  I  ittle  was  done ; 
the  defeated  powers  were  to  be  compeUed^to.  diminish 
theirs,  and  it  was  hoped  that  the  others  would  be  able  to  do 
it  later.  Numerous  questions  remained  to  be  settled,  all 
the  more  difficult  because  the  makers  of  the  treaty  would 
face  the  difficulties  and  try  to  settle  them,  not  evade 
them  by  some  specious  solution. 

Some,  who  professed  to  be  the  prophets  of  a  new  era, 
declared  that  a  peace  of  vengeance  would  only  lead  to 
new  wars,  and  that  mild  treatment,  which  would  not  offend 
Germany  and  her  friends,  was  the  only  way  to  spare  suc- 
ceeding generations  from  the  horrors  which  had  blasted 
the  present.     Some  proclaimed  that  there  must  be  no 


M 


8 

SI- 
'S 

jj  §. 


h 

ni 


33 

O 
CO 


1^ 


8^ 


o 


•5     -S 


i 

s    a  ^ 

J.   f  .1 

(S     £  1 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        581 

fr^  annexations  and  no  mdenmitiea:  Germany  and  Austria 
must  repair  the  devastation  they  had  done  in  the  invaded 
countries,  but  that  was  all.  Not  a  few  asserted  that  the 
people  of  the  Teutonic  countries  were  little,  if  any,  more  to 
be  blamed  than  the  others,  since  it  was  the  greed  of  imper- 
ialists and  capitalists,  and  the  rashness  of  diplomats  work- 
ing in  secret,  which  had  brought  on  the  war.  On  the  other 
hand  a  great  many  declared  that  Germany  and  her  allies 
must  be  stripped  to  the  uttermost  to  pay  for  the  infinite 
misery  they  had  caused;  that  it  was  vain  to  try  to  con- 

jt \  ciliate  such  people  by  mild  treatment;  that  an  enduring 

peace  could  be  obtained,  if  at  all,  only  by  so  reducing 
Germany's  power  that  she  could  make  no  unprovoked  at-^ 
tacks  in  the  future.  Some  of  these  advocates  proposed 
that  France  should  be  given  German  territory  down  to  the 
Rhine,  and  Germany  be  compelled  to  pay  for  all  the 
expenses  of  the  war.  This  last  was  obviously  impos- 
sible since  while  the  war  had  cost  the  Allies  more  than 
$120,000,000,000,  the  total  wealth  remaining  to  the 
Germans  was  apparently  not  half  that  much. 

The  question  of  the  German  colonies  attracted  less  The 
attention.  Some  declared  that  they  ought  not  to  be  German 
taken  away,  since  the  Germans  had  great  need  of  colonial 
possessions  and  had  never  had  their  fair  share.  On  the 
other  hand  it  was  asserted  that  they  had  cruelly  misused 
the  native  populations,  and  were  unworthy  to  be  entrusted 
with  ruling  them  longer. 

The  question  of  Alsace-Lorraine  was  not  really  before  Alsace- 
the  Conference,  since  the  French  had  already  occupied  it,  Lorraine 
and  were  not  willing  to  discuss  the  matter  further.  But 
the  whole  question  was  very  complicated,  and  had  already 
been  a  great  deal  discussed.  A  portion  of  the  people  in 
Lorraine  were  French,  but  most  of  the  rest  were  Germans. 
The  districts  had  long  been  attached  to  the  Holy  Roman 
Empire,  from  which  they  were  taken,  mostly  by  force,  by 
the  French,  under  Louis  XIV  and  Louis  XV.    On  the 


582 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  Czecho- 
slovaks 


other  hand,  this  territory  had  originally  been  part  of  a 
middle  Kingdom  between  Germany  and  France,  which  had 
presently  fallen  to  pieces.  After  their  incorporation  into 
the  Kingdom  of  France  the  people  of  the  provinces  became 
strongly  attached  to  the  French  government,  took  prom- 
inent part  in  the  French  Revolution,  and  thoroughly 
shared  in  the  development  of  French  nationality,  so  that 
in  1871  they  were  most  unwilling  to  be  taken  by  Germany 
from  France.  The  question  was  further  complicated 
because  of  the  great  strategic  importance  of  the  country, 
in  the  hands  either  of  Germany  or  France,  and  because  in 
Lorraine  lay  the  most  valuable  iron  deposits  in  Europe. 

The  question  of  the  Italian  frontier  seemed  relatively 
simple,  though  it  proved  to  be  particularly  difficult  in 
the  end.  It  was  generally  conceded  that  Italia  Irredenta 
should  be  taken  from  the  broken  Dual  Monarchy,  but 
its  extent  proved  not  easy  to  settle.  There  was  no  doubt 
about  the  Trentino,  nor  about  Trieste,  though  that  port 
was  Austria's  sole  outlet  to  the  sea;  but  all  down  the  Dal- 
matian coast,  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Adriatic,  were  old 
Italian  towns  and  a  fringe  of  Italian  population,  while 
the  great  mass  of  the  people,  in  the  country  behind,  were 
South  Slavs.  The  islands  and  the  seaport  towns  were, 
indeed,  largely  unredeemed  Italian  land,  but  if  they  were 
all  given  to  Italy  then  an  outlying  fringe  of  Italians  would 
shut  off  from  the  sea  a  far  greater  number  of  Jugo-Slavs. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  because  of  the  broad  untracked  Din- 
aric  Alps,  just  back  from  the  coast,  the  South  Slavic  people 
would  be  effectually  shut  off  from  the  sea  if  they  were  not 
given  Fiume. 

The  question  of  the  Czecho-Slovaks  became  prominent 
just  before  peace  was  made.  Bohemia  and  Moravia, 
which  had  been  independent  kingdoms  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
then  joined  under  one  ruler,  were  united  with  Austria 
in  1526,  the  same  year  that  part  of  Hungary  was  joined 
with  Austria  also.     The  people  were  mostly  West  Slavs, 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        583 


and  a  body  of  their  near  kinsmen,  the  Slovaks,  lived  just 
to  the  east  in  Hungary.  The  Slovaks  had  remained  a 
backward  people,  but  the  Czechs  and  Moravians  had  an 
old  culture  of  which  they  were  proud,  and  during  the  nine- 
teenth century  they  had  revived  a  strong  national  feeling. 

The  tragic  fate  of  the  Polish  people  had  for  some 
generations  aroused  the  deepest  sympathy  among  the 
statesmen  of  western  Europe  and  among  liberals  all  over 
the  world.  To  reestablish  Poland  had  long  seemed  a 
much  desired  act  of  international  justice,  but  the  difficul- 
ties in  the  way  of  it  were  so  insuperable  that  a  new  Polish 
state  was  outside  the  calculations  of  practical  statesmen. 
Now  by  the  strangest  of  coincidences  all  three  of  the 
powers  which  had  once  divided  Poland  were  ruined  by 
the  war.  There  was  little  difference  of  opinion  about 
the  reconstitution  of  Poland,  but  much  difficulty  in  de- 
termining what  the  boundaries  should  be.  In  former 
times  Poland  had  greatly  extended  her  borders  so  that 
Polish  population  was  widely  scattered  and  mixed  in 
with  other  peoples.  Therefore  it  was  not  possible  to 
make  boundaries  which  would  include  all  the  Poles  and 
not  many  Germans,  Lithuanians,  and  others,  or  such 
boundaries  as  would  include  only  Poles  without  leaving  a 
great  many  of  them  outside  the  new  state.  Moreover, 
Poland  had  formerly  extended  to  the  Baltic.  If  now  she 
were  given  her  outlet  to  the  sea  at  Danzig,  then  Prus- 
sia would  be  divided  in  two  parts. 

The  question  of  the  South  Slavs  presented  no  funda- 
mental difficulty.  It  was  generally  agreed  that  the  people 
of  the  provinces  of  Carniola,  Croatia,  Slavonia,  Dalmatia, 
Bosnia,  and  Herzegovina  should  be  given  their  freedom; 
and  there  was  already  a  movement  on  foot  to  have  them 
all  unite  with  their  kinsmen  of  Montenegro  and  Servia 
in  a  large  Jugo-Slavic  state.  It  would  undoubtedly  be 
difficult  to  hold  in  one  union  these  people,  of  the  same 
race,  indeed,  but  differing  much  in  culture  and  religion. 


Poland 


The  Jugo- 
slavs 


584 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The  immediate  difficulty,  however,  was  to  reconcile  con- 
flicting ambitions  of  Italians  and  South  Slavs  on  the  Adri- 
atic coast,  and  assure  the  new  federation  an  outlet  to  the 
sea. 

The  question  of  Constantinople  and  the  Turkish  Em- 
pire presented  such  enormous  difficulties,  that  for  the 
most  part  it  was  postponed  as  long  as  could  be.  Many 
thought  it  well  to  take  from  the  Turks  all  their  possessions 
except  Anatolia  in  Asia  Minor,  their  real  home,  and  then 
free  the  subjects  whom  they  had  so  misruled  or  distribute 
the  territories  among  Britain,  France,  Italy,  and  Greece. 
But  Constantinople,  as  always,  was  so  mighty  a  prize  that 
there  was  no  agreement  about  who  should  have  it,  and 
some  thought  the  best  solution  was  to  let  the  Turks  still 
remain. 

Since  the  proceedings  of  the  inner  council  of  the  Con- 
gress of  Paris  were  largely  secret,  the  greatest  matters 
being  settled,  as  at  Vienna,  in  private  meetings  between 
the  great  men,  the  motives  and  procedure  that  prevailed 
will  long  be  the  subject  of  conjecture.  It  is  believed  that 
at  the  opposite  extremes  were  President  Wilson  and 
Premier  Clemenceau.  The  American  statesman  stood 
for  the  high  ideals  and  the  liberal  ideas  which  the  long 
struggle  had  awakened  in  the  hearts  of  the  best  people, 
but  he  seems  to  have  been  without  great  knowledge 
of  European  statesmanship  and  conditions  and  often 
hampered  by  insufficient  information.  He  stood  first 
of  all  for  justice;  he  believed  that  an  enduring  peace 
could  best  be  obtained  by  liberal  terms;  and  he  desired 
above  all  that  the  present  opportunity  should  not  be 
allowed  to  pass  for  establishing  a  League  of  Nations,  so 
that  the  governments  might  thereafter  settle  their  dif- 
ferences by  reason  and  justice,  not  war.  The  aged  French 
premier  was  wise  with  the  wisdom  of  long  experience  and 
service.  Apparently  he  had  none  too  great  faith  in  a 
League  of  Nations,  but  was  willing  to  assist  in  establish- 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        585 


ing  such  a  thing  provided  he  was  able  to  assure  the  safety 
of  France  for  the  future.  Twice  in  his  life  had  he  seen 
France  invaded  by  the  Germans  and  terribly  ravaged, 
and  now  he  was  resolved  that  such  stern  measures  should 
be  taken  that  it  would  not  probably  happen  again.  In 
between  were  the  Italian  premier,  with  no  very  striking 
policy  aside  from  Italy's  interests,  it  would  seem,  and  Mr. 
Lloyd  George,  one  of  the  great  liberal  leaders  of  the  world, 
who  had  been  very  near  to  the  horror  and  tragedy  of  the 
conflict,  who  now  used  his  matchless  skill  in  reconciling 
the  views  of  Clemenceau  and  Wilson. 

May  7th,  the  Treaty  having  been  drawn  up  was  presented^ 
to  the  German  representatives  at  Versailles,  where  their 
leader  made  a  dramatic  declaration,  not  without  eloquence 
and  pathos,  acknowledging  Germany's  defeat,  but  de- 
daring  that  not  the  German  people  but  the  old  system  of 
European  imperialism  was  responsible  for  the  coming  of 
thewar.  June  28th  the  Treaty  was  signed.  In  a  document 
as  long  as  an  ordinary  book  the  affairs  of  Germany,  Europe, 
and  the  world  were  settled. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  Treaty  of  Versailles,  and  a  part 
of  it,  was  the  Covenant  or  agreement,  of  the  League  of 
Nations  designed  "to  promote  international  coopera- 
tion, peace  and  security,  through  open,  just  and  honor- 
able international  relations."  The  members  at  first  were 
to  be  the  powers  which  had  won  the  war  and  were  now 
signing  the  Treaty,  while  the  remaining  South  American 
states  and  the  neutral  countries  of  Europe  were  invited  to 
join.  The  seat  of  the  League  was  to  be  Geneva,  and  it 
was  to  act  through  an  assembly  in  which  ea^  member  was 
to  have  one  vote,  and  a  council  consisting  of  members 
representing  the  greater  powers.  The  particular  business 
of  the  Council  was  to  be  planning  a  reduction  of  armaments 
"to  the  lowest  point  consistent  with  safety,"  and  especially 
the  taking  of  measures  for  preventing  war.  If  there  were 
any  dispute  which  threatened  war,  it  must  be  submitted 


CL. 


The  Treaty 
of  Versailles, 
1919 


The 
Covenant 


586  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

to  arbitration  or  inquiry  by  the  council,  and  in  no  case 
should  there  be  resort  to  war  until  three  months  after  de- 
cision, which  must  be  rendered  within  a  reasonable  time. 
If  a  member  of  the  League  resorted  to  war  in  defiance 
of  these  provisions,  he  was  to  be  regarded  as  committing 
an  act  of  war  against  all  the  members  of  the  League,  who 
should  sever  relations  with  him  and  take  measures  to 
enforce  the  covenants.  It  was  further  provided  that 
members  should  abrogate  all  treaties  inconsistent  with 
the  provisions  of  the  League,  and  that  all  other  treaties 
and  engagements  should  be  made  public.  Article  X  pro- 
vided that  "The  members  of  the  League  undertake  to 
respect  and  preserve  as  against  external  aggression  the 
territorial  integrity  and  existing  political  independence 
of  all  members  of  the  League."  This  was  afterward  the 
object  of  much  criticism  as  a  provision  to  keep  things  as 
they  were,  and  make  impossible  necessary  revolution  and 
change,  much  as  the  "Holy  Alliance"  had  tried  to  do  a 
century  before;  but  it  was  difficult  to  see  how  such  a  pro- 
vision could  be  dispensed  with,  and  it  was  hoped  that 
proj)er  changes  would  be  brought  about,  when  necessary, 
by  voluntary  action  of  the  League  or  its  members.  An- 
other article  of  vast  possibilities  for  good,  but  complicated 
also  with  great  difficulties,  proclaimed  that  the  members 
should  secure  fair  and  humane  labor  conditions  every- 
where, control  traffic  in  women  and  children,  in  opium  and 
other  drugs,  in  arms  and  ammunition,  and  give  just  treat- 
ment to  native  populations.  That  this  Covenant  con- 
tained defects  was  not  to  be  doubted,  and  a  large  number 
of  objections  were  easily  raised.  But  it  was  evident  that 
numerous  objections  might  always  be  made  with  respect 
to  any  great  constructive  effort  involving  changes,  as 
had  been  the  case  with  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  the  great  reforms  of  the  French 
Revolution,  the  passing  of  the  British  Electoral  Reform 
Laws,  and  the  emancipation  of  the  serfs  in  Russia. 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        587 


This  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations  was  the  first 
section  of  the  Treaty  with  Germany.  By  other  provisions 
Alsace-Lorraine  was  ceded  to  France,  a  small  district,  to 
Belgium,  and  to  Poland  a  sniall  portion  of  Silesia  and  the 
greater  part  of  Posen  and  West  Prussia.  She  was  to  re- 
nounce her  agreements  with  Belgium  and  Luxemburg;  she 
was  to  cede  to  France  the  coal  mines  of  the  Saar  Basin, 
on  the  French  frontier,  in  compensation  for  the  wanton 
and  terrible  destruction  of  the  French  coal  mines  about 
Lens,  the  district  to  be  administered  by  the  League  of 
Nations  for  fifteen  years,  the  people  of  the  district  to  deter- 
mine after  that  time  whether  they  would  continue  under 
the  League,  or  be  united  with  Germany,  or  with  France. 
Altogether  Germany  lost  thus  more  than  35^000  square 
miles,  a  sixth  of  her  former  area,  and  perhaps  TJdOQJiDO 
of_. her  population.  Whereas  in  1914  she  had  an  area 
of  207,000  square  miles  and  a  population  of  68,000,000 
by  the  Treaty  of  Versailles  she  was  reduced  to  about 
170,000  square  miles  and  about  60,000,000  of  people. 
Furthermore,  East_Prussia  was  now  left  separated  from 
the  remainder  of  Germany  by  a  "corridor"  of  Polish  ter- 
ritory running  down  to  the  Baltic  Sea,  while  Danzig 
was  made  a  free  city  under  the  guarantee  of  the  League 
of  Nations.  In  the  districts  surrendered  to  Poland  and 
to  France  lay^a  considerable  part  of  the  coal  and  iron  ore 
upon  which  Germany's  industrial  greatness  had  been 
founded,  and  also  her  military  strength.  It  was  possible 
thus  that  for  generations  her  strength  and  her  greatness 
had  passed  away. 

She  was  required  to  abrogate  the  Treaty  of  Brest- 
Litovsk,  which  she  had  forced  on  Russia;  she  was  to  recog- 
nize the  independence  of  Austria,  of  Czecho-Slovakia* 
and  Poland,  the  new  states  which  were  being  established; 
leave  the  fate  of  the  Danish  country  once  taken  from 
Denmark  to  be  decided  by  the  people  themselves;  and 
destroy  the  fortifications  of  the  fortress  of  Heligoland. 


The  Treaty 

with 

Germany 


Destruction 
of   German 
military 
power 


588 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


The 
indemnity 


Character  of 
the  Treaty 


Outside  of  Europe  she  was  to  renounce^alliieiLpossessions, 
her  colonies,  her  rights  in  China,  Siam,  Liberia,  and 
Morocco,  cede  her  rights  in  Shantung  to  Japan,  and  recog- 
nize the  British  protectorate  over  Egypt.  She  was  to 
abolish  conscription,  and  limit  her  army  to  100,000  men, 
her  navy  to  a  few  small  ships,  with  no  submarines,  her 
warships  being  surrendered  to  the  Allies,  and  she  was  to 
have  no  airplanes  for  purposes  of  war.  She  was  also 
forbidden  to  keep  any  fortresses  within  a  icrxe^  q\  f^^^ritriry 
extending  from  her  western  frontier  to  fifty  JkUoffieters  east 
of  the  Rhine. 

The  Treaty  declared  that  the  war  had  been  forced  upon 
the  Allies  by  German  aggression.  To  repair  the  damage 
and  losses  caused  to  them,  Germany  was  to  pay  an  indem- 
nity of  which  the  amount  was  to  be  fixed  later  on,  in  ac- 
cordance with  Germany's  ability  to  pay,  and  which  was 
later  fixed  at  $30,000,000,000.  She  was  to  replace  ton 
for  ton  the  merchant  ships  destroyed  in  the  wajv  aiuLshe 
was  to  imdertake  the  restoration  of  the  areas  devastated 
by  her  armies  of  invasion.  The  Kiel  Canal  and  certain 
rivers  of  Germany  were  to  be  opened  to  free  navigation. 

This  Treaty,  which  according  to  some  was  fearful  and 
impossibly  severe,  was  viewed  with  dismay  by  others  as 
not  sufficiently  binding  Germany  as  to  make  impossible 
another  aggression,  and  by  no  means  giving  compensation 
for  the  evil  and  suffering  she  had  caused.  There  was  no 
doubt  that  the  provisions  of  the  settlement  reduced  Ger- 
many to  poverty  and  weakness;  but  there  was  also  no 
doubt  that  the  people  of  England,  Italy,  and  France, 
despite  all  indemnities  that  Germany  could  pay,  would 
for  generations  remain  crushed  under  burdens  of  taxation 
such  as  they  had  never  known  before,  necessary  from  ex- 
penditures caused  by  the  war.  The  indemnities  required 
were  not  plunder,  but  merely  to  make  good  the  ruin  which 
Germans  had  wrought,  and  the  reparation  thus  made  was 
very  incomplete.    The  terms  of  disarmament  imposed 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920 


589 


made  the  beginning,  it  was  to  be  hoped,  of  general  reduc- 
tion of  armaments,  which  the  people  of  the  democratic 
countries  had  long  much  desired.  The  populations  sur- 
rendered were  largely  Polish  or  Danish  and  partly  French, 
and  the  territories  now  to  be  given  up  had  all  previously 
beeiiJ:aken_away  from  Poland,  or  Denmark,  or  France.^ 


G  E  R  M  A  N  y\ 


Ajkrainia 


•^^  A  U  S  T  R  I  A 


Scale  of  Miles 


ctin»»i.  cmhikccoiuci 


7  '■' 

'        HUNGARY^ 

r  R  U  M  A  N  I    A 

y 


28.    CZECHO-SLOVAKIA 


The  results  of  the  war  being  what  they  were,  and  the  evil 
conditions  which  had  come  from  the  war  being  as  great 
as  they  were,  the  peace  was  probably  as  good  a  one  as 
under  the  circumstances  was  to  be  made.  All  in  all,  it 
had  not  been  made  in  a  spirit  of  hatred  or  revSge,  nor 
with  desire  to  destroy  the  German  people. 

With  the  allies  of  Germany  separate  treaties  were  made. 
As  a  result  of  the  war  Austria-Hungary  had  fallen  to  pieces. 
From  the  ruins  had  arisen  Czecho-Slovakia,  and  the  state 


Treaty  of 
St.  Germain 
with 
Austria,  1919 


590  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

^JLhe_Serbs,.Croat5j^_ajid  Slovenes,  whose  indejieadence 
the  Allies  had  acknowledged.  Accordingly  the  Dual 
l^pnarchy  had  ceased  to  exist.  With  Austria  and  with 
Hungary  arrangements  were  made  which  stipulated  that 
the  Treaty  of^restJLitovsk  should  be  renounced  and  also 
rijghts  in  Egypt,  Morocco,  Siam,  and  jChina;  the  navy 
should  be  surrendered,  and  an  indemoity.p4ia.  No  states 
suffered  more  fearful  fate  than  Austria  and  Hungary. 
Austria — once  the  leading  state  in  Europe,  and  long  the 
principal  power  in  the  Dual  Monarchy,  which  in  1914 
had  a  population  of  51,000,000  and  an  area  of  260,000 
square  miles — was  now  reduced  to  the  petty  inland  state  of 
German  Austria,  with  40,000  square  miles  and  a  popula- 
tion of  9,000,000.  The  splendid  old  capital,  Vienna,  was 
left  with  too  little  territory  to  support  its  greatness  and 
soon  became  a  sad,  deserted,  famine-stricken  place,  while 
the  Austrian  population,  largely  because  of  the  destruc- 
tion and  ravages  of  the  war,  were  soon  in  such  terrible 
straits  that  they  had  no  recourse  but  the  charity  of  the 
world.  By  a  later  treaty  IJungany  likewise  was  bereft  of 
much  of  her  territory  and  all  of  her  alien  populations. 
She  also  was  left  a  minor,  inland  state  of  35,000  square 
miles,  containing  8,000,000  people;  and  she  was  soon 
overrun  and  plundered  by  Rumanian  armies  who  now 
took  vengeance  for  the  miseries  put  upon  themselves  two 
years  before.  With  Bulgaria  _ajreaty  was  made  which 
imposed  upon Jier  5in_indeirmity,  and  took  from  her  the 
territories  which  she  had  seized  from  Sgrvia,  Rumania, 
and  Greece,  during  the  war,  while  the  disposition  of  the 
territory  giving  her  access  to  the  Mgesin  was  to  be  de- 
cided by  plebiscite  of  the  local  population.  Bulgaria 
was  left,  therefore,  the  least  important  of  the  Balka,n 
states,  in  the  midst  of  rivals  who  had  grown  great  by  the 
war.  By  a  treaty  agreed  upon  after  much  difficulty  and 
delay,  Turkey  was  stripped  of  most  of  her  possessions. 
Constantinople  was  left  nominally  to  the  Sultan,  but  the 


I 


29.    THE  BALKANS  IN  1920 


591 


592 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Ratification 
of  the 
Treaty  of 
Versailles, 
1919-20 


The  United 
States  fails 
to  ratify 


straits  were  internationalized,  the  European  territory  of 
the  Porte  was  given  mostly  to  Greece,  and  the  Ottoman 
dominions  in  Asia  were  largely  divided  among  Great 
Britain,  France,  Italy,  and  Greece. 

The  more  important  part  of  the  work  done  at  Paris, 
and  submitted  at  Versailles,  was  the  treaty  with  Germany 
embodying  the  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations. 
It  was  signed  at  Versailles  June  28th.  A  few  days  later  it 
was  ratified  by  the  German  Republic.  At  the  end  of 
July  it  was  ratified  by  Great  Britain  and  by  Poland;  in 
the  following  month,  by  Belgium;  and  in  October  by  the 
British  dominions,  by  Italy,  and  by  France;  and  at  the 
end  of  December  by  Japan.  Meanwhile  the  surrendered 
German  fleet,  which  had  been  interned  at  Scapa  Flow, 
north  of  Scotland,  having  been  sunk  by  the  German 
crews,  the  Supreme  Council  issued  a  protocol  containing 
provisions  for  making  good  their  loss  by  surrender  of  addi- 
tional German  shipping,  about  the  acceptance  of  which 
there  was  considerable  negotiation  and  some  delay;  but 
January  10,  1920,  the  Protocol  having  been  accepted. by 
the  German  government,  ratifications  were  exchanged  at 
Versailles  and  the  Treaty  put  into  effect.  On  this  day, 
then,  formally,  the  Great  War  came  to  an  end. 

In  that  great  event  the  United  States  took  no  part. 
She  had  exerted  enormous,  if  not  decisive,  power  in  the 
later  stages  of  the  war,  and  during  the  negotiations  of 
Paris  her  president  had  taken  a  prominent  part.  It  was 
due  particularly  to  his  efforts  that  a  League  of  Nations 
had  been  planned  and  the  Covenant  embodied  in  the 
Treaty..  But  he  had  been  unable  to  secure  its  ratification 
in  the  United  States^  The  assent  of  two  thirds  of  the 
Senate  was  necessary  for  the  acceptance  of  any  treaty.  A 
considerable  number  of  senators  refused  to  accept  the 
Covenant  without  amendments  which  the  President  was 
unwilling  to  have  made,  and  the^  Covenant  was  not  ac- 
cepted and  the  treaty  with  Germany  not  sanctioned. 


I 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        593 


The  war  and  the  settlement  at  Paris  made  immense 
changes  in  European  relations  and  altered  the  map  of  the 
world  more  than  it  had  ever  been  changed  at  one  time 
before.  In  Europe  itself  France  became  again  what 
she  had  once  been  for  such  a  long  time:  first  of  the  Conti- 
nental  powers.  A  great  number  of  her  best  men  had  been 
killed  and  her  resources  so  drained  that  she  was  thoroughly 
exhausted,  but  she  had  now  acquired  such  resources  and 
such  position,  that  if  she  recovered  at  all  she  would  most 
probably  have  a  splendid  future  before  her,  and  her  co- 
lonial empire  remained  intact.  Italy  had  at  last  got  the 
unredeemed  lands,  the  head  of  the  Adriatic  at  Trieste, 
aBiLalso  the  end  of  the  Adriatic  by  establishing  a  protec- 
torate„over  Albania,  For  the  time,  at  least,  this  sea  was 
entirely  under  her  domination.  Across  on  the  other 
side  was  the  new  Jugo-Slavic  state.  The  age-long  enemy, 
Austria,  had  been  removed  from  all  rivalry  in  the  future. 
Belgium,  slightly  enlarged,  and  enormously  enhanced  in 
prestige,  at  once  began  to  recover  from  the  disaster  that 
had  fallen  upo{i  her. 

In  central  Europe  the  changes  were  still  greater.  The 
Germ an„Empir e  had  fallen  with  the  great  disasters  to  its 
armies  in  eastern  France.  Just  before  the  Germans  sur- 
rendered tnere  were  outbreaks  in  many  places;  the  Kaiser 
and  some  of  the  lesser  rulers  fled  from  the  country,  social- 
ist republics  were  hastily  set  up,  and  jaJgrlin  and  es- 
pecially  in  Munich  there  were  communist  disorders  much 
like  those  of  Paris  in  1871,.  For  a  moment  it  seemed  that 
Germany  was  about  to  split  into  pieces  and  sink  down 
into  the  chaos  of  ruin  and  disorder  into  which  Russia 
had  just  gone  before  her.  But  the  strong  and  solid  quali- 
ties of  the  German  people  reasserted  themselves;  the 
disorders  were  suppressed ;  the  separatist  movements  were 
checked;  and  in  place  of  the  German  Empire  there  pres- 
ently appeared  a  federation  of  republics  much  like  the 
United  Stales  of  America,  except  that  constitution  and 


The  new 
era:    France 


Italy 


of  the 
German 
Empire, 
1918     • 


594 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Position  of 
the   German 
Republic 


Austria    and 
Hungary 


nrgan  i za  t ipj}  w^re  snoialiswdj-lpKft,-  in  d f^oH  y-iJmji.  ir^  Russia, 
but  more  thoroughly  than  anywhere  else  in  the  world. 
In  the  midst  of  national  disorganization  and  disaster, 
liable  for  an  indemnity  of  vast  and  indefinite  amount,  this 
government  maintained  itself  with  in rreasijog.  difficulty . 
It  probably  had  the  support  of  most  of  the  German  people 
for  the  time,  but  it  was  constantly  threatened  on  the  one 
side  by  reactionaries  and  Junkers,  who  hoped  to  see  the 
older  forms  soon  restored,  anff  on  the  other  by  radicals 
and  "Spartacides,"  or  extreme  communists,  who  wanted 
a  complete  revolution,  more  like  the  one  in  Russia. 

The  German  state  was  greatly  reduced  in  power  and 
reputation;  its  old  industrial  prosperity  was  gpne.  its 
commerce  had  vanished,  its  colonies  were  completely  lost. 
Most  of  its  territory  it  still  retained,  but  its  immensely 
inaportant  district&  on  the  upper  Rhine  and  in  Posen  were 
gong,  and  with  them  vast  stores  of  iron  ore  and  coal. 
Ifjhhe  parts  of  the  Republic  reinained  together  through 
the  lean  and  hard  years  to  come,  there  was  the  hope  that 
Germany  later  on  might  recover  and  grow  great  once 
more,  and,  next  to  France,  be  the  greatest  Continental 
power;  but  it  would  be  a  generation  before  one  could 
be  sure  of  this. 

For  the  old  Dual  Monarchy  there  was  no  hope  of  a 
better  day.  In  what  was  the  realm  of  Austria-Hungary 
the  servants  of  other  days  had  become  masters,  and  set 
up  for  themselves.  In  the  north  was  Czecho-Sloyakia, 
with  its  capital  at  Prague,  apparently  with  a  great  indus- 
trial future  before  it.  To  the  east  a  new  Poland  had  ap- 
peared, which  might  later  be  one  of  the  great  European 
states  if  only  it  could  live  now  through  the  period  of 
death-like  weakness  in  which  war  and  famine  had  left  it. 
To  the  south  on  the  western  side  was  the  state  of  the 
once-despised  South  Slavs,  with  Italy  holding  the  Adriatic; 
while  to  the  south  on  the  eastern  side  was  the  greater 
Rumania,   which  statesmen  had  so  often  dreamed  of, 


I 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF    1920 


595 


doubled  in  size  by  having  taken  Transylvania  from  the 
Magyars.  In  the  midst  of  these  newcomers  were  Hun- 
gary, poor,  and  surrounded,  without  access  to  the  sea,  and 
with  uncertain  future,  and  Austria,  poor  and  weak,  and 
similarly  cut  off,  having,  perhaps,  as  her  greatest  hope, 
future  incorporation  with  Germany. 


CEWEIIAL  ORAfTING  CO  INC  NY 


30.    JUGO-SLAVIA 

The  greatest  changes  of  all  had  taken  place  in  eastern 
Europe.  Not  only  had  Russia  broken  to  pieces,.-but  she 
had  gone  down  in  a  revolution  fundamental  and  sweepiug. 
For  the  time  she  ceased  to  be  one  of  the  great  powers  of 
the  world.  All  the  outlying  parts  had  dropped  off: 
Finland,  the  Baltic  Provinces,  Poland,  Bessarabia,  the 
Ukraine^  the  Caucasus,  and  a  great  part  of  Siberia.  It 
might  be  that  all  of  these  countries  would  later  on 
be  brought  together  in  a  great  federation;  but  it  might 


Changes 
eastern 
Europe: 
Russia 


596 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


also  be  that  the  powerful  Russia  of  the  days  before  the 
war-gas  pot  to  appear  again. 
The  Slavs  None  the  less,  the  standing  of  the  Slayic  peoples  in 

Europe  had  been  for  the  time  improved.  If  on  the  one 
hand  the  Russian  Empire  had  broken  to  pieces,  yet  the 
fragments  had  set  up  autonomous  governments,  and  on  the 
other  hand  the  Slavs  of  central  Europe,  so  long  held  by 
_German  masters,  had  got  their  freedom  at  last.  Whether 
Poland,  lying  between  Bolshevist  Russia,  and  a  vengeful 
Germany,  could  maintain  herself,  remained  to  be  seen. 
The  fate  of  Czecho-Slovakia  also  1^^  hidden  in  the 
future.  The  new  state  of  thefS^uth^Sfavs  would  cer- 
tainly encounter  most  diflScult  problems  in  holding  to- 
gether such  elements  as  the  Serbs,  the  Croats,  and  the 
Slovenes.  None  the  less  Poland,  Czecho-Slovakia,  Jugo- 
slavia, and  also  Rumania  were  now  established  as  con- 
siderable states,  and  the  prospects  of  the  West  and  the 
South  Slavs  were  brighter  than  they  had  been  for  five 
hundred  years. 
Africa   and  Africa  had  fallen  practically  into  the  hands  of  Britain 

^^^*  and  France.     In  Asia  all  the  northern  part  still  belonged 

to  the  Russians,  but  the  far  more  important  southern  part, 
all  of  it  from  Arabia  to  Malaysia,  was  now  under  the 
control  of  Great  Britain.  In  the  East  almost  all  the  im- 
portant strategic  positions  and  approaches  taJQhina  were 
in  the  hands  of  Japan. 
The   domi-  For  a  chance  to  be  one  of  the  great  world  empires  Ger- 

nant  powers     many  had  struck  in  1914,  and  her  defeat  in  1918  had  for 
the  present  definitively  taken  from  her  the  possibility 
of  obtaining  it.     Bjis^a,  if  she  recovered,  might  be  one 
of  the  greatest,  as  might  Japan  if  she  continued  her  won- 
/    derf  ul  expansion  and  success,  and  succeeded  in  her  aggres- 
\l     sions  on  the  mainland.     But  the  two  powers  which  now 
K  indubitably  held  first  place  were  the  British  Empire  and 
^     xhe  United.  States.     In  her  large  population,  intelligent 
and  prosperous,  in  her  infinite  wealth,  her  immense  re- 


r 

,r^.. ' 

1 

r 

I 

i 

I 

f 

31.    THE  BRI 


kw. 


AV 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        597 

sources,  the  United  States  held  unrivalled  position.  But 
iQore  imposing,  though  intrinsically  less  strong,  was  the  _ 
position  of  the  British  Empire.  She  controlled  most  of 
AfnoB^SLud  a  great  part  of  Asia;  her  colonies,  her  navaL 
stations,  her  strategic  positions  were  everywhere;  she 
was  mistress  of  the  seas,  and  held  the  approaches  to  the 
best  routes,  the  entrance  to  the  Mediterranean  and 
all  the  environs  of  Suez.  Together  the  British  Empire 
and  the  United  States  held  assured  control  of  the  seas, 
and  had  in  their  keeping  so  great  a  part  of  all  the  world's 
wealth  and  resources,  so  large  a  part  of  all  of  the 
earth's  coal  and  iron,  tin  and  copper  and  gold,  so  much 
oX_its,  meat  and  wheat  and  corn,  that  for  the  present 
to  a  great  extent  the  destiny  of  the  world  was  in  their 
keeping.  Fortunate  it  might  seem  that  such  unparalleled 
greatness  and  wealth  had  come  to  the  peoples  which, 
notwithstanding  many  errors  and  mistakes,  had  most 
cherished  democracy,  humanity,  and  free  development. 
The  best  of  the  English-speaking  peoples  might  well  be 
humble  in  contemplation  of  the  mighty  prospect  before 
them. 

But  however  bright  might  seem  the  future  of  the  most  Crushing 
fortunate,  the  outlook  of  most  of  the  European  nations,  ^^^^ 
even  their  present,  was  dark  indeed.  Seldom  had  there 
been  so  much  desolation  and  waste,  so  much  misery  and 
woe-  The  total  cost  of  the  war,  variously  estimated,  had 
been,  perhaps,  at  least  $200,000,000,000,  of  which  nearly 
two  thirds  had  been  the  cost  to  the  Allies.  Such  vast 
expenditures  in  four  years'  time  could  in  no  wise  be  met 
out  of  income,  and  the  funds  had  been  raised  only  in  small 
part  through  taxation.  Great  Britain  and  afterward  the 
United  States  had  raised  through  taxes  the  greatest  sums 
ever  so  obtained  in  the  history  of  mankind;  but  France 
and  Italy,  Austria-Hungary,  and  especially  the  German 
Empire,  had  issued  repeated  loans,  hoping  to  make  the 
defeated  enemy  pay  suflBcient  indemnity  to  cover  them 


598  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

later  on.  Had  the  war  jitf^n  sho^^-  it  is  possible  that  the 
victor  might  have  been  able  to  do  this,  but  when  the  long 
struggle  was  over  it  was  evident  that  the  ruined  Central 
Powers  had  not  ^igmaining  sufficient  substance  to  make 
good  the  damage  they  had  wrought  and  then  reimburse 
to  the  victors  the  expenditures  entailed~~by  the  war. 
Hence  the  present  generation  found  itself  burdened^^th  a 
terrible,  crushing  mortgage  which  might  be  repudiated, 
which  might  be  paid  off  after  a  great  many  years  of  econ- 
omy  and  toil,  which  might  remain  indefinitely  as  a  ver- 
itablejniUsUme  about  the  necks  of  weaker  peoples_jn,  the 
future^  In  191i,the  national  debt  of  France  was  about 
^ix  billion  dollars;  after  the  war  it  was  about  thirty-three 
billion,  or  more  than  half  of  her  national  wealth.  The 
debt  of  Great  Britain  had  risen  from  more  than  three 
bOHon  dollars  to  about  fg^^  The  financial  position 

of  Germany  and  of  Austria  was  so  utterly  desperate  that 

th^^ir   f\lt,"^^    sftlvflti'nn    pniild   ht^    hnppH    for    rfl|]]fir    thP" 

understood.  Hard  work,  meager  living,  crushing  taxes 
alone  could  get  rid  of  these  debts. 
Heritage  of  More  terrible  than  the  waste  and  the  heritage  of  debt 
was  the  loss  of  life  and  happinpss  ftiHlJlfiglth  whiVh  J_hf> 
war  had  brought^  The  number  of  men  killed  was  esti- 
mated at  9,000,000,  and  the  total  casualties  of  the  strug- 
gle at  33,000,000.  Horrible  had  been  the  losses  of  Ger- 
many and  Russia,  and  the  very  flower  of  tke  manhood  jof 
France  was  ^ne^„  For  a  generation  it  would  be  a  ques- 
tion whether, France. gr^ema.iin.Poland  could_ ever  re- 
cover, and  during  all  this  time  from  the  Jlighlands  of 
Scotland  to  the  great  plain  of  Russia  travellers  would  see 
mutilated  or  weakened  men  dragging  out  the  course  of 
their  lives.  Millions  of  children  were  orphans,  millions 
of  women  widows.  To  other  millions  of  women  it  would 
seem  that  a  curse  was  upon  the  earth  in  the  time  that 
they  lived,  for  many  could  never  expect  to  marry  or  hope 
to  be  mothers  of  children. 


woe 


THE  SETTLEMENT  OF  1920        599 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  cost  of  the  war:  E.  L.  Bogart,  Direct  and  Indirect  Costs 
ofthe  Great  War  (1919). 

The  effects  in  Germany:  Ferdinand  Runkel,  Die  Deutsche 
Revolution  (1919). 

National  aspirations:  Rene  Johannet,  Le  Principe  des  Na- 
tionalites  (1919),  critical  of;  R.  W.  Seton- Watson,  Europe  in 
the  Melting-Pot  (1919);  Ralph  Butler,  The  New  Eastern 
Europe  (1919),  concerning  Finland,  Poland,  Lithuania,  and  the 
Ukraine. 

Improvements  desired  in  the  new  era  hoped  for:  Towards  a 
Lasting  Settlement  (1916),  essays  by  several  liberal  and  radical 
authors,  edited  by  C.  R.  Buxton;  W.  H.  Dawson,  Problems  of 
the  Peace  (1918);  Arthur  Ponsonby,  Democracy  and  Diplomacy: 
a  Plea  for  Popular  Control  of  Foreign  Policy  (1915);  Richard 
Roberts,  The  Unfinished  Programme  of  Democracy  (1919). 

The  Congress  of  Paris:  Dr.  E.  J.  Dillon,  The  Peace  Confer- 
ence (1919),  critical  of  and  not  very  satisfactory;  Sisley  Huddle- 
ston.  Peacemaking  at  Paris  (1919);  A  History  of  the  Peace 
Conference  of  Parisy  ed.  by  H.  W.  V.  Temperley,  vol.  I  (1920); 
C.  T.  Thompson,  The  Peace  Conference  Day  by  Day  (1920). 

A  League  of  Nations:  Viscount  Bryce,  Essays  and  Addresses 
in  War  Time  (1918);  G.  L.  Dickinson,  The  European  Anarchy 
(1916);  Viscount  Grey  and  others,  The  League  of  Nations  (1919); 
Lord  Eustace  Percy,  The  Responsibilities  of  the  League  (1919) ; 
Sir  Frederick  Pollock,  The  League  of  Nations  (1919),  with  an  ex- 
cellent historical  introduction;  Charles  Sarolea,  Europe  and  the 
League  of  Nations  (1919);  J.  C.  Smuts,  The  League  of  Nations 
(1919). 

The  Treaty  of  Versailles:  J.  L.  Garvin,  The  Economic  Founda- 
tions of  Peace  (1919) ;  Gabriel  Hanotaux,  Le  Traite  de  Versailles 
de  28  Juin,  1919  (1919);  J.  M.  Keynes,  The  Economic  Conse- 
quences of  the  Peace  (1919),  a  brilliant  but  specious  attack  on  the 
economic  conditions  of  the  Treaty. 


Russia 
and  the 
Great  War 


CHAPTER    XIII 
THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION 

By  the  Grace  of  God,  We,  Nicholas  II.,  Emperor  of  x\ll  the  Russias, 
Tsar  of  Poland,  Grand-Duke  of  Finland,  etc.,  to  all  our  faithful 
subjects     ... 

.  .  .  we  have  recognized  that  it  is  for  the  good  of  the  country 
that  we  should  abdicate  the  Crown  of  the  Russian  State     .     .     . 

May  God  help  Russia. 

Decree  of  Abdication  of  the  Tsar,  March  15,  1917. 

Russia  is  declared  to  be  a  Republic  of  Soviets  of  Workmen's,  Soldiers* 
and  Peasants'  Deputies.  All  the  power  in  the  center  and  in  the 
provinces  belongs  to  these  Soviets. 

.  .  .  private  ownership  of  land  is  abolished,  and  the  whole  land 
fund  is  declared  common  national  property  and  transferred  to  the 
laborers  without  compensation. 

Inheritance,  whether  by  law  or  by  will,  is  abolished. 
Decrees  of  the  Soviet  Government  of  Russia,  1917. 

Nowhere  in  Europe  was  the  old  order  so  completely 
altered  by  the  War  as  in  Russia.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
War  the  Russian  armies  had  considerable  success;  but  in 
1915  the  Teutonic  allies  defeated  them  completely,  and 
from  this  disaster  the  Russians  never  recovered.  It  was 
then  seen  that  an  agricultural  state,  not  well  organized, 
could  sustain  no  long  conflict  with  an  industrial  power  well 
organized  and  equipped.  Russian  war  supplies  were  ex- 
hausted, the  transportation  system  broke  down,  immense 
numbers  of  men  had  been  killed  or  wounded,  the  country 
was  filled  with  miserable  refugees  from  provinces  taken 
by  the  foe.  It  is  true  that  a  great  national  enthusiasm  had 
been  aroused  at  the  beginning  of  the  war.  Russians  de- 
sired to  help  their  kinsmen  in  Servia,  and  there  was  an 

'     600 


THE  RUSSIAN  REVOLUTION      601 


outburst  against  all  things  German,  the  old  name  of  the 
capital,  St.  Petersburg,  being  changed  to  Petrograd,  the 
Slavic  equivalent.  But  many  of  the  officials  and  reaction- 
aries had  no  desire  to  continue  the  war,  and  plotted  to 
make  peace  with  Germany  as  soon  as  they  could.  They 
feared  that  a  continuance  of  the  disastrous  conflict  would 
destroy  their  privileges  and  position,  and  not  a  few  of  them 
were  of  German  sympathy  or  extraction.  But  the  liberals 
in  the  Duma  steadily  supported  the  war,  believing  that 
only  with  its  triumphant  conclusion  could  they  obtain  the 
changes  which  they  hoped  for;  and  the  local  zemstvos  did 
splendid  work  in  relieving  distress  and  providing  material 
of  war.  In  1916  the  Russians  made  a  last  splendid  effort, 
with  much  success,  but  at  enormous  cost;  and  after  this 
they  could  do  no  more.  By  the  end  of  the  year  the  nation 
was  almost  completely  exhausted;  the  inefficient  govern- 
ment had  nearly  broken  down,  and  thought  only  of  making 
peace  in  time  to  save  itself;  and  the  people  had  suffered 
almost  to  the  limit  of  their  endurance. 

The  end  came  with  a  suddenness  which  surprised  the 
world.  The  poorer  people  in  Petrograd  were  starving,  and 
hunger  now  drove  them  to  revolution.  Early  in  March, 
1917,  bread  riots  began,  which  increased  until  the  whole 
city  was  filled  with  fighting  and  confusion,  during  which 
the  troops  deserted  the  government  and  went  over  to  the 
mobs.  The  opposition  in  the  Duma  was  plotting  to  over- 
throw the  government  at  this  very  time;  and  the  Duma 
was  suspended.  The  other  great  cities  of  the  Empire 
joined  the  revolution,  and  a  part  of  the  Duma  now  set  up 
a  provisional  government.  The  abdication  of  the  Tsar 
was  demanded.  March  15th,  Nicholas  II,  "Emperor  of 
All  the  Russias,"  laid  down  his  power,  and  the  dynasty  of 
the  Romanovs  came  to  an  end. 

As  after  events  were  to  show  this  was  one  of  the  most 
momentous  events  in  the  history  of  Europe.  For  ages 
autocracy  had  maintained  itself  in  eastern  Europe.    For  a 


The  Revolu- 
tion, 1917 


FaU  of  the 
Tsardox9 


602 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Attempted 

moderate 

reforms 


Extreme 
socialists: 
the  Bol- 
aheviki 


thousand  years  at  Constantinople  the  Byzantine  emperors 
had  ruled  absolutely,  heads  of  Church  and  State.  Of  this 
civilization  the  Russians  had  been  principal  heirs,  and  their 
government  and  their  religion  had  in  the  course  of  cen- 
turies been  spread  over  half  of  Europe.  Under  the 
Russian  tsars  lived  a  fourth  part  of  all  the  white  people 
in  the  world.  While  most  of  the  others,  in  Europe  and  the 
Americas,  had  developed  self-government  and  gone  for- 
ward in  progress,  the  Slavs  had  lagged  far  behind.  Now, 
after  supporting  the  old  system  for  a  long  time  or  else 
passively  enduring  its  evils,  they  suddenly  overthrew  it, 
and,  as  was  evidenced  very  soon,  overthrew  it  completely. 

The  provisional  government  attempted  to  effect  liberal 
reform,  restore  order,  and  vigorously  continue  the  war. 
This  government  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Constitutional 
Democrats  led  by  Prince  Lvov,  and  by  Miliukov,  and  as- 
sisted by  Kerensky,  a  moderate  socialist  leader.  An 
assembly  was  to  be  called  to  draw  up  a  new  constitution, 
and  meanwhile  a  general  amnesty  was  proclaimed  for 
political  offenders;  freedom  of  speech  and  universal  suf- 
frage were  announced  for  both  men  and  women. 

But  the  liberal  leaders  were  by  no  means  able  to  control 
the  revolution.  The  socialists  and  radicals  in  both  city 
and  country  joined  forces.  They  began  now  to  be  known 
as  the  Bolsheviki.  Twelve  years  before,  at  the  time  of  the 
first  revolution,  the  Social  Democratic  party  of  the  in- 
dustrial workers  was  already  split  into  two  parts,  a  mod- 
erate minority,  the  Mensheviki  (Russian  menshe,  less)  and 
the  majority  of  radicals,  led  by  Nicolai  Lenine,  Bolsheviki 
{bolshcy  more).  Now  in  1917  the  more  radical  peasants 
of  the  Social  Revolutionary  Party  combined  with  the 
radical  socialists  of  the  cities,  desiring  a  far  more  thorough 
revolution  than  had  yet  been  attained,  and  caring  less  for 
mere  political  change  than  thorough  social  alteration.  To 
bring  this  about  they  wished  to  end  the  war  at  once. 
Their  leaders  taught  that  the  struggle  had  been  brought 


THE  RUSSIAN  REVOLUTION      603 


about  by  capitalists  and  imperialists  of  all  the  countries 
alike,  all  of  whom  had  as  their  chief  interest  exploiting  the 
masses.  Everywhere  the  proletariat  and  the  mass  of  the 
people  must  compel  the  making  of  peace,  and  then  the 
people  must  overthrow  the  upper  class  and  the  selfish 
bourgeoisie  and  capitalists,  and  usher  in  the  great  reforms 
of  the  socialists,  which  would  bring  real  freedom  to  the 
masses  of  the  world. 

Such  were  the  Bolsheviki.  Their  teachings  were  not  new 
but  to  some  of  the  hungry,  disheartened,  suffering  people 
of  Russia,  most  of  whom  had  no  political  experience  what- 
ever, these  doctrines  came  as  a  great  new  message.  All 
over  the  world  the  dislocation  of  the  war  had  produced  a 
stirring  and  unrest,  and  a  willingness  of  men  to  hearken 
to  strange,  revolutionary  doctrines.  The  teachings  of  the 
Bolsheviki  began  to  spread  over  the  country,  undermining 
what  was  left  of  the  existing  order.  The  Germans  soon 
understood  how  greatly  Russia  would  be  weakened  by  this, 
and  helped  Russian  extremists  to  return  to  the  country, 
and  assisted  them  as  much  as  they  could.  The  Russian 
soldiers  were  told  that  they  need  not  obey  their  oflScers, 
and  all  discipline  was  soon  at  an  end.  They  were  likewise 
told  that  the  land  was  being  divided  up  among  the  people, 
and  they,  deserting  to  get  their  share,  the  Russian  armies 
melted  away.  The  socialists  demanded  a  democratic 
peace  with  "no  annexations  and  no  indemnities."  Ger- 
man soldiers  fraternized  with  the  Russians  declaring  that 
they  also  desired  this,  and  the  war  on  the  east  front  prac- 
tically came  to  an  end. 

Meanwhile  the  Provisional  Government  of  liberals  was 
trying  to  rule  and  continue  the  war.  In  many  places, 
however,  the  radicals  took  affairs  into  their  own  hands,  the 
people  choosing  Soviets  (committees  or  councils)  of  dele- 
gates of  the  soldiers  or  peasants  or  workingmen.  Of  these 
the  most  powerful  and  important  was  the  Soviet  at  Petro- 
grad,  which  regarded  itself  as  representing,  in  effect,  the 


The 

Germans 
and  the 
Bolsheviki 


The 

Bolsheviki 
get  control 


604 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


The  Peace 
of  Brest- 
Litovsk, 
1918 


radicals  of  the  country.  In  every  way  possible  it  opposed 
the  Provisional  Government,  and  determined  to  get  control 
of  the  government  for  itself.  It  was  not  long  before 
Miliukov  and  Prince  Lvov  lost  power  and  Kerensky  be- 
came the  head  of  affairs;  but  he  who  had  formerly  seemed 
a  radical  was  soon  left  far  behind  in  the  violent  progress 
of  the  Revolution.  He  strove  valiantly  to  restore  the 
armies,  but  the  Germans  completely  routed  the  Russians 
and  in  September  captured  Riga  in  the  north.  Lenine,  the 
Bolshevik  leader  was  now  in  the  country,  as  was  Leon 
Trotzky,  who  had  also  taken  part  in  the  Revolution  of 
1905.  Boldly  and  with  great  energy  and  skill  they  urged 
the  workmen  to  overthrow  the  old  system  completely,  and 
more  and  more  did  disorder  and  anarchy  increase  as  the 
old  system  went  down  into  ruin,  as  Kerensky  and  other 
moderates  lost  hold,  and  as  the  Bolsheviki  took  their  place. 
In  November  the  garrison  of  Petrograd  went  over  to  them 
and  Kerensky  fled  from  the  city.  He  strove  to  recover 
his  power  but  was  defeated,  and  fled  from  the  country. 
Meanwhile  the  Bolsheviki  gained  Moscow,  Kiev,  and  other 
places,  fighting  fiercely,  and  putting  down  their  enemies 
with  iron  hand. 

The  Russian  Revolution  now  entered  upon  another 
phase.  The  Bolsheviki  abandoned  the  Allies,  and  began 
negotiations  for  a  separate  peace.  The  Germans  who  had 
no  more  to  gain  now  by  pretended  friendship,  threw  off  the 
mask,  and  at  Brest-Litovsk  in  March,  1918,  comp>elled 
the  Russian  leaders  to  agree  to  a  terrible  peace.  Finland, 
Poland,  the  Baltic  Provinces,  the  Ukraine,  were  to  be 
abandoned  along  with  other  places,  and  Russia,  paying  a 
huge  indemnity,  was  to  be  left  cut  off  almost  entirely  from 
the  sea,  and  in  economic  subservience  to  the  German 
Empire.  Lenine  and  Trotzky  regarded  all  this  without 
great  concern.  They  had  no  desire  for  unwilling  peoples 
to  be  held  subject  by  Russia,  and  they  believed  that  Bol- 
shevism among  the  German  masses  would  soon  overthrow 


THE  RUSSIAN  REVOLUTION      605 


German  autocracy  also.  Meanwhile  they  turned  with 
greater  interest  to  the  domestic  alterations  which  they 
had  most  at  heart. 

They  wished  Russia  to  be  a  republic  in  which  political 
power  would  be  vested  in  Soviets  or  councils  of  workmen, 
soldiers,  or  peasants.  The  state  was  to  be  socialized,  tak- 
ing over  banks,  railways,  industrial  enterprises,  and  land, 
to  nationalize  them  and  make  them  the  property  of  all  of 
the  people.  A  series  of  decrees  was  issued  to  effect  these 
designs,  and  to  abolish  inheritance  and  private  owner- 
ship. While  many  changes  were  made,  some  of  them  in 
theory  at  least  having  much  merit,  a  great  part  of  the 
program  soon  broke  down.  The  peasants  had  already 
seized  a  great  part  of  the  land  and  divided  it  up,  and  were 
little  disposed  to  see  it  taken  away  and  made  the  property 
of  the  nation.  The  new  order  in  Russia  was  regarded  with 
much  suspicion  elsewhere,  especially  when  the  Bolshevists 
announced  their  intention  of  overthrowing  capitalism  and 
bourgeoisie  in  all  countries,  and  the^ Allies  were  hostile  to  it. 
Great  disorders  broke  out  and  numerous  coimter-revolu- 
tionary  movements,  in  the  course  of  which  there  were  great 
cruelty  and  slaughter,  and  much  destruction  of  property. 
Apparently  Russia  sank  lower  and  lower  in  economic 
demoralization  and  confusion,  but  Lenine  and  Trotzky, 
who  had  completely  subordinated  the  sovietSy  ruthlessly 
crushed  all  resistance.  Great  numbers  of  the  upper 
classes  and  more  intelligent  people  were  slaughtered,  and 
some  time  in  1918  the  Tsar  was  murdered  miserably  in  a 
faraway  place. 

The  end  of  the  Great  War  brought  no  peace  for  Russia. 
By  most  of  the  people  in  the  rest  of  the  world  the  Bolshe- 
vists were  regarded  with  fear  and  suspicion,  and  Russia 
was  not  permitted  to  have  communication  with  other 
countries.  Meanwhile,  several  great  counter-revolution- 
ary movements  were  organized.  In  Siberia  Admiral  Kol- 
chak,  in  south  Russia  General  Denikin,  along  the  Baltic 


The 

Bolshevist 
alteration  of 
Russia 


Counter- 
revolution- 
ary move- 
ments 


606 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Obscurity 
of  the 
subject 


General  Yudeniteh,  all  prepared  to  march  upon  the  center 
of  the  country  and  overthrow  Bolshevist  rule.  At  one 
time  they  all  seemed  to  be  near  to  considerable  success, 
but  by  the  end  of  1919  Lenine  and  Trotzky  were  com- 
pletely triumphant.  Much  obscurity  surrounds  these 
events.  It  would  seem  that  the  efforts  of  Kolchak  and 
Denikin,  which  were  supported  by  the  Allied  countries, 
were  regarded  to  some  extent  as  outside  aggression  and 
that  the  Russian  people,  with  national  spirit  aroused, 
rallied  to  support  the  government  in  power,  even  though 
many  of  them  had  as  little  love  for  Lenine  and  Bolshevism 
in  1918  and  1919  as  some  Frenchmen  in  1793  had  for 
Robespierre  and  a  republic.  It  is  probable,  moreover, 
that  some  of  the  strongest  supporters  of  the  counter- 
revolutionary leaders  were  members  of  the  upper  classes 
and  dispossessed  landowners  who  hoped  that  the  over- 
throw of  Bolshevism  would  make  possible  a  return  of  the 
privileges  and  possessions  they  had  lost. 

No  event  for  a  hundred  years  had  aroused  such  strong 
feeling  as  the  Bolshevist  Revolution,  and  there  were  such 
diverse  opinions  about  it  and  such  conflicting  information 
that  it  was  nearly  impossible  to  find  out  the  truth.  It 
would  seem  that  the  Bolsheviki  succeeded  because  they 
acted  with  the  greatest  vigor  and  determination  in  a  time 
of  confusion,  establishing  a  ruthless  dictatorship  which 
crushed  all  opponents,  and  that  they  were  supported  partly 
by  Russian  national  spirit  and  partly  by  those  who  dreaded 
reaction.  But  it  also  seemed  probable  that  they  were 
a  small  minority,  that  their  extreme  socialistic  program 
was  a  failure,  and  that  they  were  doomed  shortly  to  fall. 
It  was  also  certain,  however,  that  the  old  Russia  had  dis- 
appeared. Later  on,  perhaps,  after  exceeding  misery  and 
exhaustion,  the  Russians,  with  autocracy  gone  and  the 
lands  in  possession  of  the  people,  would  go  forward  in  the 
construction  of  a  new  and  better  state,  more  nearly  on  the 
model  of  great  democracies  elsewhere. 


THE  RUSSIAN  REVOLUTION      607 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General  accounts:  the  best  book  on  the  Russian  Revolution 
which  has  so  far  appeared  is  Claude  Anet,  La  Revolution  Russe, 
4  vols.  (1918-19);  Catherine  Breshkovsky,  A  Message  to  the 
American  People  (1919) ;  Etienne  Buisson,  Les  BolchSviki  (1917- 
1919):  Fails,  DocumentSy  Commentaires  (1919);  E.  J.  Dillon, 
The  Eclipse  of  Rusda  (1918) ;  A.  F.  Kerensky,  The  Prelude  to 
Bolshevism,  the  Kornilov  Rebellion  (1919);  Colonel  V.  I.  Lebe- 
deff ,  The  Russian  Democracy  in  Its  Struggle  against  the  Bolshe- 
vist Tyranny  (1919);  E.  A.  Ross,  Russia  in  Upheaval  (1919); 
John  Spargo,  Bolshevism:  the  Enemy  of  Political  and  Industrial 
Democracy  (1919);  Leon  Trotzky  [Bronstein],  The  History  of 
the  Russian  Revolution  to  Brest-Litovsk  (1919). 

The  Bolshevist  leaders:  M.  A.  Landau- Aldanov,  LSnine 
(1919);  Nicolai  Lenin  [V.  I.  Ulianov],  The  State  and  Revolution 
(1919);  L.  Trotzky,  Our  Revolution:  Essays  on  Working-Class 
and  International  Revolution,  1904--1917,  collected  and  trans- 
lated by  M.  J.  Olgin  (1918),  for  many  of  the  ideas  about  sup- 
pressing the  bourgeoisie  and  erecting  a  dictatorship  of  the  pro- 
letariat, and  The  Bolsheviki  and  World  Peace  (1918). 


CHAPTER    XIV 


wonderful 
age 


Production 
and  trans- 
portation 


EUROPEAN    CIVILIZATION    SINCE 
THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 

In  order  to  estimate  its  full  importance  and  grandeur     ...     we 
must  compare  it,  not  with  any  preceding  century,  or  even  with  the 
last  niillennium,bul  with  the  whole  historical  period — ^perhaps  even 
with  the  whole  period  that  has  elapsed  since  the  Stone  Age. 
A.  R.  WalIiAce,  The  Wonderful  Century  (1898),  pp.  1,  2. 

But  it  seems  to  me  that  ...  we  have  here  reached  something 
deeper  than  poetry.  In  the  sense  of  illimitable  vastness  with  which 
we  are  oppressed  and  saddened  as  we  strive  to  follow  out  in  thought 
the  eternal  metamorphosis,  we  may  recognize  the  modem  phase 
of  the  feeling  which  led  the  ancient  to  fall  upon  his  knees,  and 
adore  .  .  .  the  invisible  Power  whereof  the  infinite  web  of 
phenomena  is  but  the  visible  garment. 
John  Fiske,  Cosmic  Philosophy  (1874),  part  ii.  chapter  vii. 

The  period  between  the  French  Revolution  and  the 
present  was  the  most  wonderful  in  the  history  of  mankind. 
In  no  preceding  epoch  did  such  vast  change  or  such  won- 
drous advancement  occur.  It  was,  above  all,  an  age  of 
invention  and  brilliant  scientific  discovery;  and  men  were 
able  to  make  use  of  the  elements  of  nature  and  change  the 
conditions  of  their  living  more  than  had  ever  been  so  in  the 
past. 

The  fundamental  problems  of  feeding,  housing,  and 
clothing  people  were  solved  as  never  before.  Much 
better  agricultural  methods  were  gradually  worked  out, 
and  the  extension  and  systematic  use  of  fertilizers  made 
it  possible  to  get  much  more  food  from  the  soil.  It  was 
during  this  period  also  that  large  new  fertile  areas  were 

608 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION 


609 


cultivated  for  the  first  time  in  North  America  and  South 
America  and  other  places  to  which  Europeans  had  gone. 
Because  of  labor-saving  machinery,  prodigious  quantities 
of  food  could  now  be  produced  and  used  to  feed  other  men 
and  women  who,  also  working  with  labor-saving  machines, 
were  able  to  produce  manufactured  goods,  and  also  great 
quantities  of  luxuries  and  of  new  things  not  before  made. 
At  the  same  time  the  making  of  better  roads  and  canals, 
the  introduction  of  railways  and,  toward  the  end  of  the 
period,  motor  transportation,  made  it  possible  for  the  first 
time  easily  to  carry  the  products  of  great  inland  districts 
like  Russia  and  the  central  plains  of  the  United  States. 

In  this  way  the  materials  for  building  were  easily  got 
from  the  forests  and  quarries  to  the  places  where  the  con- 
struction was  wanted,  and  a  greater  number  of  buildings 
were  quickly  made  than  ever  before.  Construction  was 
more  and  more  carried  on  with  gigantic  labor-saving 
devices  and  by  better  principles  of  engineering,  so  that  large 
public  buildings  and  improvements  were  everywhere  im- 
dertaken.  What  the  Egyptians  had  long  ago  done  by  the 
slow,  incredible  toil  of  multitudes  of  slaves;  what  the 
Romans  had  once  done  by  patient,  intelligent  labor;  what 
Europeans  had  occasionally  done  in  the  Middle  Ages  and 
the  later  centuries  in  their  glorious  churches  for  the  service 
of  God  and  in  palaces  for  princes  or  guilds,  was  now  every- 
where easily  accomplished  in  very  short  time  where  people 
accumulated  wealth  and  used  the  machines  of  the  Indus- 
trial Revolution.  Magnificent  public  buildings  were 
easily  constructed,  vast  warehouses,  depots,  railway  sta- 
tions, and  docks,  and  magnificent  bridges  were  built  on  a 
scale  seldom  dreamed  of  before. 

For  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  world  such  reser- 
voirs and  aqueducts  were  built  that  a  great  many  people 
had  suflBcient  water  and  could,  if  they  desired,  keep  clean. 
Some  of  the  great  Roman  cities  had  had  plentiful  supplies 
of  water  through  wonderful  aqueducts;  but  during  medie- 


Building 


Supply 
of    wator 


610 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


vaJ  times  and  the  centuries  following,  even  in  the  prosper- 
ous cities  and  towns  most  people  got  their  water  from 
wells  or  from  cisterns;  usually  there  was  no  water  supply 
in  houses,  the  generality  of  people  seldom  bathed,  and  not 
a  few  washed  faces  and  hands  only  on  rare  occasions. 
Skin  diseases,  itch,  and  the  various  ailments  ascribable  to 
filth  were  much  more  common  then  than  now,  and  there 
must  have  been,  for  most  people,  far  less  of  the  wholesome 
comfort  that  comes  from  clean  mouth  and  clean  skin. 
During  the  nineteenth  century  th.e  ^eat  cities,  and  pres- 
ently most  of  the  large  towns  in  the  more  prosperous  coun- 
tries, brought  copious  quantities  of  water  from  some  distant 
and  undefiled.  source,  and  carried  it  in  small  pipes  into  the 
houses  of  individuals,  so  that  for  the  first  time  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  world  it  was  easily  possible  for  many  people  to 
get  enough  water  for  washing,  for  bathing,  and  for  cook- 
Heating  jjjg  During  this  same  time,  also  because  of  great  im- 
provements in  mining  and  because  of  the  increased  trans- 
portation facilities,  it  was  possible  to  heat  dwellings  with 
coal  in  the  winter,  and  an  increasing  number  of  people 
were  now  able  to  be  comfortable  in  their  houses  in  cold 
weather  and  get  warm  water  for  washing.  Small  bathtubs 
were  made  in  increasing  numbers,  first  of  wood  lined  with 
tin,  and  much  later  of  porcelain,  while  stoves  and  systems 
of  heating  by  hot  air  or  vapor  or  steam  were  used  more 
and  more.  The  best  of  these  things  were  never  extensively 
used  except  by  the  wealthier  classes  or  in  the  most  pros- 
perous countries.  In  most  parts  of  Europe  the  older  tubs 
were  used  or  else  none  at  all,  and  the  better-to-do  people 
biUTied  coal  or  wood  in  their  fireplaces,  while  during  cold 
weather  the  masses  shivered  or  huddled  in  their  thickest 
clothes,  as  their  ancestors  had  long  done  before  them. 
Illumination  In  this  period  a  marvellous  revolution  was  effected  in 
artificial  lighting.  For  ages  people  depended  almost  en- 
tirely on  the  Sim  for  their  seeing.  Torches,  rushes,  bra- 
ziers, candles  and  lamps  were  much  employed  by  those 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION        611 

able  to  afford  them;  but  for  most  people  these  things  were 
too  costly,  and  it  was  inconvenient  even  to  get  fire  in  the 
first  place,  for  this  could  only  be  done  by  flint  and  tinder 
or  by  keeping  a  coal  alive.  Few  inventions  have  brought  Matches 
greater  convenience  to  many  people  than  the  matches,  or 
little  splints  of  wood  dipped  in  material  easily  rubbed  and 
ignited,  which  certain  Englishmen  invented  about  1827. 
At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  gas,  made  from  coal, 
was  just  beginning  to  be  used  to  light  factories  and  homes, 
but  in  the  next  half  century  it  was  widely  and  successfully 
used,  the  gas  being  generated  in  huge  containers  and  then 
sent  through  small  pipes  into  the  places  where  it  was  to  be 
used.  Meanwhile,  in  1782,  Argand,  a  Swiss  inventor, 
perfected  in  England  a  lamp  which  gave  better  light  than 
any  such  device  had  ever  given  before.  Oil  for  illumina- 
tion was  now  got  in  greater  quantities,  first  from  whales, 
then  from  the  earth,  until  cheap  good  lamps,  and  petro- 
leum or  coal  oil  made  it  possible  for  fairly  good  lights  to  be 
had,  even  in  small  and  isolated  places.  Gloomy  and 
sombre  enough  this  illumination  was  in  comparison  with 
what  was  to  follow;  but  for  the  first  time  it  became  possible 
for  many  people  to  see  at  night.  In  the  later  years  of  the 
nineteenth  century  electricity  began  to  supplant  gas  for 
lighting,  and  the  small  incandescent  lamps  in  houses  and 
the  powerful  arc  lights  in  city  streets  made  it  possible  to 
prolong  the  activities  or  amusements  of  the  day  into  the 
night,  thus,  in  effect,  making  man's  life  longer  and  more 
productive  than  ever  before. 

In  medieval  times,  and  of  old,  good  clothing  and  cover  for  Clothing 
the  feet  were  difficult  to  make  and  expensive  to  buy.  There 
were  splendid  and  luxurious  garments  for  the  wealthy,  but 
the  masses  of  the  people  could  neither  produce  nor  buy 
many  clothes;  and  many  wore,  until  they  could  be  worn 
no  longer,  garments  which  became  greasy,  filthy,  tattered, 
and  covered  with  patches,  and  either  went  barefoot  or  in 
wooden  sandals   or   shoes.     In   the  latter    part   of   the 


612 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Communi- 
cation and 
transporta- 
tion 


Railwayi 


eighteenth  century,  to  the  wool  and  the  silk  once  used  were 
added  great  quantities  of  cotton,  which  in  the  later  age 
became  the  principal  substance  used  to  clothe  people. 
The  new  machines  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  did  the 
work  of  spinning  and  weaving  with  marvellous  quickness. 
Then  in  1845  an  American  inventor,  Elias  Howe,  made  a 
sewing  machine  which  enabled  people  to  do  sewing  more 
quickly  than  ever  before.  Machinery  for  making  shoes 
was  also  developed,  especially  in  America,  and  for  the  first 
time  multitudes  of  people  could  get  good  cheap  shoes. 

During  this  period  there  was  a  revolution  in  transporta- 
tion and  great  improvement  in  means  of  communication. 
Down  to  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  most 
people  never  travelled,  and  few  went  far  away  from  the 
place  in  which  they  worked  or  were  bom.  The  easiest 
travel  and  communication  were  on  the  sea  in  sailing  ships, 
which  went  their  course  in  what  seems  now  leisurely  way. 
Travelling  on  land  was  by  horseback  or  stage  coach; 
transportation  by  pack  or  wagons.  There  had  been  a 
magnificent  system  of  highways  in  western  and  southern 
Europe  during  the  greatness  of  the  Roman  Empire,  but 
the  Roman  roads  had  mostly  long  since  disappeared,  and 
while  there  had  been  some  excellent  ones  constructed  in 
England  and  France  in  the  eighteenth  century,  most  of 
the  roads  were  poor.  Travelling  and  transportation  were 
always  slow,  as  it  would  now  seem,  diflScult,  and  in  rainy 
seasons  they  came  almost  altogether  to  an  end.  During 
all  this  time  the  best  inland  communication  was  by  river 
or  canal. 

Frenchmen  and  Englishmen  had  been  developing  the 
steam  engine  since  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
though  it  was  not  until  about  1769  that  an  Englishman, 
James  Watt,  made  such  improvements  in  it  that  it  became 
a  very  effective  and  powerful  device.  In  1808  Richard 
Trevithick  built  a  railway  in  London,  and  in  1825  George 
Stephenson  made  a  locomotive  capable  of  drawing  a  heavy 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION        613 


load.  In  that  year  the  first  railway  of  any  importance 
was  constructed  in  England,  the  trains  being  exceedingly 
crude  and  uncomfortable  and  regarded  as  dangerous  by 
the  people  who  saw  them.  In  the  course  of  the  nineteenth 
century  all  the  great  cities  and  seaports  of  Europe  were 
connected  by  railway  lines,  so  that  it  was  possible  to  travel 
swiftly  and  comfortably  overnight  from  London  to  Edin- 
burgh or  from  Madrid  to  Paris,  and  so  that  immense 
quantities  of  freight  could  be  quickly  despatched,  though 
in  Europe  the  rivers  and  canals  continued  to  be  used  for 
freight  transportation  much  more  than  in  the  United 
States.  At  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century  another 
great  change  in  locomotion  on  land  was  brought  about 
when  certain  Frenchmen  perfected  devices  by  which  ve- 
hicles could  be  driven  by  power  from  motors  which  they 
carried,  over  ordinary  roads  and  not  railroads  specially 
prepared  for  them.  The  coming  of  the  automobile  made 
it  possible  for  people  to  move  about  more  easily  than  ever 
before. 

Several  successful  attempts  were  made  to  drive  a  ship 
by  means  of  an  engine,  the  most  notable  being  that  of 
Robert  Fulton,  an  American,  in  1807.  During  the  first 
half  of  the  century  the  stately  old  ships  of  an  older  time 
continued  to  bear  most  of  the  traffic  on  water,  but  grad- 
ually steamships  took  their  place  first  because  of  greater 
speed,  and  afterward  because  they  were  cheaper,  while 
the  wooden  vessels  were  displaced  first  by  iron  ships  and 
then  by  ships  of  steel.  In  the  eighteenth  century  one  or 
two  months  was  needed  to  cross  the  Atlantic;  but  in  1838 
the  Great  Western  went  from  Bristol  to  New  York  in  fifteen 
days,  and  in  1914  some  of  the  swiftest  English  liners  could 
make  the  passage  in  six.  Early  in  the  twentieth  century, 
as  the  result  of  much  experiment  and  effort  by  Americans 
and  Frenchmen,  devices  were  made  capable  of  carrying 
men  through  the  air.  Airplanes  were  among  the  principal 
instruments  employed  in  the  Great  War,  but  their  possi- 


Auto- 
mobiles 


The 
steamship 


Airplanes 


i\:-^ 


614 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


General 
results 


Communica- 
tion of  news 
and  ideas 


Paper  and 
printing 


biHties  for  communication  and  transporting  things  can 
scarcely  be  estimated  yet. 

The  result  of  all  these  things  was  that  many  people  were 
able  to  go  from  one  place  to  another  quickly  and  easily 
on  business  or  pleasure  in  a  way  never  before  conceived  of 
except  in  the  imagination  of  dreamers.  And  for  the  first 
time  immense  quantities  of  goods  could  be  taken  from  the 
place  of  their  origin  to  where  they  were  wanted,  cheaply 
and  quickly.  Large  as  the  world  may  yet  seem,  it  has,  be- 
cause of  railroads  and  steamships  and  airplanes,  shrunk 
very  small,  and  it  is  not  easy  for  most  people  now  living  to 
realize  how  distant  and  remote  far  places  seemed  in  the 
days  of  old. 

During  the  nineteenth  century  also  enormous  advances 
were  made  in  getting  news  and  disseminating  information. 
There  had  been  newspapers  in  western  Europe  since  the 
first  half  of  the  seventeenth  century,  but  there  was  not 
yet  any  great  supply  of  cheap  paper  and  there  was  no  large 
reading  public.  Moreover  it  was  not  easy  to  get  news. 
An  English  or  a  Dutch  newspaper  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury was  generally  small,  with  not  more  than  eight  pages, 
containing  advertisements  of  quacks  and  patent  medicines, 
political  and  literary  essayg,  local  gossip,  and  a  small 
amount  of  news  from  abroad,  often  many  weeks  old. 
The  cost  of  sending  letters  was  high  and  delivery  often 
delayed  and  uncertain,  so  that  there  was  then  no  large  and 
constant  interchange  of  correspondence. 

During  the  course  of  the  nineteenth  century  paper  was 
made  cheaper  and  in  much  greater  quantities.  In  1814 
the  London  Times  began  to  operate  a  printing  press  by 
steam,  and  it  was  soon  possible  to  do  printing  very  fast. 
Books  and  newspapers  gradually  became  more  numerous, 
and  cheaper.  And  during  the  time  that  this  was  taking 
place  general  systems  of  education  began  to  be  developed 
in  some  of  the  European  countries,  with  the  result  that 
more  people  wanted  things  to  read  more  than  ever  before. 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION        615 


The  improved  facilities  for  travel  and  rapid  communica- 
tion which  the  railroad  and  steamboat  afforded  made  it 
possible  to  get  much  more  news  more  quickly,  for  letters 
w  ere  now  rapidly  sent  long  distances  at  slight  expense. 

Then  a  number  of  inventors  began  working  on  the  prob- 
lem of  sending  communications  by  means  of  electricity, 
and  just  before  1840  several  successful  results  were 
achieved.  Such  telegraphic  messages  were  first  sent  over 
wires  on  the  land  but  soon  men  began  to  try  to  lay  wires 
or  cables  under  the  water  and  so  extend  the  system.  In 
1851  a  submarine  line  was  laid  from  Dover  across  to  Calais, 
and  in  1866,  after  many  preparations  and  one  unsuccessful 
attempt,  the  first  ocean  cable  was  laid  from  Ireland  to 
America.  After  this  time  cables  were  placed  under  all 
the  principal  bodies  of  water,  and  by  the  end  of  the  century 
it  was  possible  to  send  messages  over  land  or  sea  all  around 
the  world  with  lightning  speed.  Not  long  after  the  tele- 
graph had  been  invented,  by  which  electrical  signals  were 
transmitted,  the  telephone  was  developed,  by  which  it  was 
possible  to  hear  the  voice  of  one  talking  a  long  distance 
away.  Then  early  in  the  twentieth  century  an  Italian, 
Marconi,  invented  a  method  of  telegraphy  without  any 
wires,  by  which  the  messages  were  sent  through  the  air, 
and  this  method  was  soon  applied  to  telephony  also.  As 
a  result  of  these  things  it  was  possible  for  men  to  keep  in- 
formed about  the  doings  of  governments  and  peoples  in  a 
way  never  dreamed  of  before.  Indeed  self-government 
and  democracy  on  a  large  scale  could  scarcely  have  been 
possible  except  for  these  marvelous  methods  of  inter- 
course, travel,  and  communication. 

Before  the  nineteenth  century  there  were  few  pictures. 
Objects  were  represented  in  sculptures  and  pictures  in  the 
churches,  in  marginal  illuminations  in  the  old  manuscripts, 
and  afterward  by  rude  wood-cuts  in  books  or  on  broad- 
sides. The  wealthy  could  afford  portraits,  or  pictures 
woven  in  tapestry,  or  paintings  upon  their  walls;  but  until 


The 
telegram 


The 

submarine 

cable 


The 
telephone 


Pictorial 
representa- 
tion 


616 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


a  hundred  years  ago  things  were  generally  represented 
to  people  who  had  not  seen  them,  not  by  some  reproduction 
to  be  perceived  through  the  eye,  but  by  description  in 
words  to  be  heard  or  read  and  understood  in  the  mind. 
It  is  probable,  therefore,  that  imagination  and  ability  to 
realize  words  were  more  highly  developed  in  many  people 
then  than  now. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  several 
scientists  worked  upon  the  idea  of  making  pictures  by  the 
operation  of  light,  and  in  1839  a  Frenchman,  Daguerre, 
succeeded  in  obtaining  beautiful  portraits,  which  were 
afterwards  known  as  Daguerreotypes.  This  was  the 
foundation  of  the  art  of  photography,  which  was  after- 
ward perfected  and  cheapened,  until  in  the  twentieth 
century  incredible  numbers  of  pictures  were  taken  and 
spread  broadcast.  Further  developments  were  gradually 
worked  out.  After  many  efforts  it  was  possible  to  photo- 
graph colors  as  well  as  shape  and  light  and  shade.  In 
1895  Rontgen,  a  German  scientist,  announced  his  dis- 
covery of  the  so-called  X-rays  of  light,  which  penetrate 
through  the  spaces  in  opaque  objects,  and  make  it  possible 
for  pictures  of  objects  on  the  other  side  or  in  the  interior  of 
substances  to  be  taken.  A  few  years  afterward,  Edison, 
an  American,  invented  the  cinematograph,  by  which  pic- 
tures of  an  object  in  motion  were  taken  so  rapidly,  that 
when  they  were  afterward  shown  in  succession  the  effect 
was  a  "moving  picture."  The  "cinemas"  or  "movies" 
were  soon  improved  and  spread  all  over  the  world,  afford- 
ing entertainment  and  instruction  to  unnumbered  multi- 
tudes, in  Constantinople  and  Cadiz  as  well  as  New  York 
and  London.  Edison  had  also  invented  the  phonograph, 
by  which  sounds  could  be  recorded  and  reproduced,  and 
this  presently  brought  good  music  to  a  multitude  of 
people. 

The  result  of  all  this  was  to  make  the  lives  of  people 
full  of  a  variety  of  things,  which  formerly  they  had  not 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION 


617 


enjoyed,  and  had  not  been  troubled  with.  If  life  had 
once  been  harder,  it  had  also  been  simpler,  quieter,  more 
placid.  Now  it  was  richer  and  fuller,  but  far  more  rapid, 
feverish  and  troubled,  and  it  could  not  easily  be  so  deep 
and  complete  as  once  it  had  been. 

In  some  of  the  great  branches  of  organized  human 
knowledge  most  of  the  advance  ever  made  was  achieved 
in  this  time.  Such  was  not  the  case  with  mathematics, 
even  though  immense  new  fields  were  explored  and  great 
contributions  made,  for  mathematics  was  already  the  oldest 
and  most  mature  of  the  sciences.  Nor  was  it  true  of  as- 
tronomy which  was  also  very  old,  and  to  which  contribu- 
tions of  fundamental  importance  had  already  been  made. 
Nevertheless,  in  the  nineteenth  century  a  multitude  of 
studies  with  more  powerful  telescopes,  with  more  delicate 
instruments,  with  mathematics  more  fully  developed,  and 
with  the  spectroscope  and  spectrum  analysis,  made  fur- 
ther discoveries  of  which  the  total  result  made  a  revolu- 
tion in  men's  ideas.  Above  all  was  this  true  of  spectrum 
analysis,  through  which,  by  studying  the  composition  of 
light,  it  became  possible  to  know  the  material  out  of  which 
other  heavenly  bodies  were  made  and  even  to  calculate 
their  motions.  The  Greeks  of  Alexandria  had  thought  of 
the  earth  as  the  center  of  things,  with  smaller  sun  and 
moon  and  stars  going  about  it.  By  the  end  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  all  this  had  been  changed  to  the  idea  of 
the  sun  as  the  center  with  the  earth  going  about  it,  and 
more  distant  planets  and  their  satellites  also  revolving 
around  it.  But  at  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century 
people  thought  of  the  sun  and  its  attendants,  even  the 
outermost  planet  Neptune,  2,800,000,000  miles  away,  as 
only  a  small  part  of  all  things.  So  vast  had  distances 
now  become,  that  they  could  only  be  measured  by  the 
stupendous  unit  of  the  light  year,  the  distance  which 
light,  travelling  186,000  miles  a  second,  would  go  in  a 
year.     From  the  earth  to  the  sun  light  would  go  in  eight 


Scientific 
progress 


Astronomy 


The 
universe 


618  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

minutes,  but  four  years  would  be  required  for  passage  from 
the  solar  universe  to  the  nearest  star,  and  a  million  years 
or  a  hundred  million,  perhaps,  to  another  spiral  nebula 
like  the  Milky  Way,  of  which  it  may  be  the  sun  is  a  part. 
So  is  modern  man  overwhelmed  by  the  immensity  of 
things  and  the  smallness  and  futility  of  himself,  as  in 
ancient  days  the  Hebrew  psalmist  and  king:  "When  I 
consider  the  heavens,  the  work  of  thy  fingers,  the  moon 
and  the  stars.     .     .     .     What  is  man.'*" 

But  most  of  the  great  work  in  two  other  branches  of 
knowledge,  physics  and  chemistry,  was  done  in  the  pe- 
riod from  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Previous 
to  that  time  very  little  was  known  about  sound,  light, 
heat,  almost  nothing  about  magnetism  and  electricity, 
and  scarcely  a  thing  about  the  chemical  elements,  though 
in  1661  an  Englishman,  Boyle,  defined  them,  and  ex- 
plained the  necessity  of  determining  what  they  were. 
About  the  time  of  the  French  Revolution  an  American, 
Benjamin  Thompson,  observed  that  the  process  of  boring 
a  cannon  generated  heat,  and  concluded  that  heat  was  not 
a  substance,  as  most  people  had  thought  before,  but  mo- 
tion or  energy,  and  the  Englishmen,  Sir  Humphrey  Davy 
and  James  Joule,  afterward  made  further  experiments, 
which  led  to  the  theory  of  the  conservation  of  energy. 
This  theory,  which  became  the  fundamental  law  of 
physics,  declared  that  energy  was  neither  created  nor 
destroyed,  but  transformed  from  one  phase  to  another; 
that  a  body,  for  example,  moving  could  generate  heat, 
and  that  conversely  heat  applied  to  a  body  could  make  it 
move.  This  theory  was  fully  worked  out  by  Joule,  by 
William  Thompson,  afterward  Lord  Kelvin,  and  by  the 
German  Helmholtz. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  it  was  gen- 
erally believed  that  light  was  caused  by  the  emission  from 
a  luminous  body  of  tiny  corpuscles  or  small  pieces  of  mat- 
ter; but  this  corpuscular  theory  of  light  gave  way  before 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION 


619 


Spectrum 
analysis 


Electricity 


the  wave  or  undulatory  theory,  as  a  result  of  the  work  of 
Thomas  Young  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury and  a  Frenchman,  Fresnel,  a  little  later.  Worked 
out  in  another  way  this  presently  led  to  spectrum  analysis, 
one  of  the  greatest  of  all  the  contributions  of  the  period. 
A  succession  of  English  and  German  scientists,  among 
whom  were  WoUaston,  Sir  John  Herschell,  Fraunhofer, 
Kirchoff,  and  Bunsen,  observed  that  a  band  of  light  pro- 
duced by  passing  light  through  a  prism,  was  crossed  by 
lines;  and  it  was  gradually  learned  that  the  different  ele- 
ments, giving  out  light  waves  of  different  lengths,  pro- 
duced the  lines  of  the  spectrum  band. 

At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  two  Italians,  Gal- 
vani  and  Volta,  developed  the  electric  battery  and  so 
founded  electrical  science;  but  the  cost  of  generating  elec- 
tricity by  their  method  was  very  great,  and  the  using  of 
electrical  energy  was  postponed  until  other  devices  had 
been  discovered.  In  1819  a  Danish  investigator,  Oersted, 
discovered  the  relation  between  electricity  and  magnetism, 
and  a  body  of  investigators,  chief  among  whom  was  the 
Frenchman,  Ampere,  soon  developed  electro-dynamics, 
by  which  it  became  practicable  to  convert  electricity  into 
mechanical  energy;  presently  electricity  became  one  of 
the  principal  servants  of  mankind. 

Shortly  before  the  French  Revolution  the  Englishman,  Chemistry 
Priestley,  and  Scheele,  a  Swede,  discovered  oxygen,  and 
shortly  after  the  Frenchman,  Lavoisier,  who  died  on  the 
guillotine  in  1794,  decomposed  air  and  water  into  their 
elements  and  laid  the  foundation  of  modern  chemistry. 
After  this  time  the  elements  were  gradually  isolated,  and 
many  investigators  carefully  decomposed  substances 
and  studied  combinations.  Meanwhile  John  D  alt  on,  an 
Englishman,  formulated  the  theory  that  elements  were 
composed  of  atoms  or  small  indivisible  bodies,  and  that 
in  different  elements  the  atoms  had  different  weights;  and 
his  theory  was  strengthened  by  the  discoveries  of  the 


620 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Mastery  of 
the  forces  of 
nature 


The  art 
of  war 


Swedish  scientist,  Berzelius,  and  the  Italian  Avocadro. 
Later  investigations  by  many  observers  resulted  in  the 
conception  of  the  atom,  the  smallest  quantity  of  an  ele- 
ment which  can  be  present  in  a  compound,  and  of  the 
Tnolecuhy  the  smallest  quantity  either  of  an  element  or  a 
compound  which  can  exist  in  free  state. 

The  general  result  of  all  the  advance  made  in  chemistry 
and  physics  was  that  men  learned,  in  a  way  scarcely 
dreamed  of  in  previous  ages,  to  understand  the  forces 
and  things  existing,  and  make  use  of  them  as  powerful 
servants  and  assistants.  In  olden  times  the  aristocracy,  a 
small  upper  class,  lived  upon  the  labor  of  slaves.  As  a 
result  of  the  scientific  work  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
done  mostly  in  Europe,  a  great  part  of  mankind  had  more 
leisure  and  lived  easier  lives,  because  of  the  work  of  the 
great  forces  of  nature  now  employed  for  production  and 
service. 

Concerning  men  and  women,  their  bodies  and  their 
welfare,  there  were  great  innovations  both  in  the  art  of 
conserving  them  and  in  the  art  of  destruction.  There 
were  more  terrible  devices  for  warfare  on  sea  and  land, 
at  the  same  time  that  unparalleled  advances  were  made 
in  physiology  and  biology,  in  surgery,  in  medicine,  and 
in  preventing  diseases. 

Great  changes  took  place  in  the  art  of  war  on  land 
many  of  them  being  demonstrated  for  the  first  time  by 
Napoleon  and  his  generals.  At  the  beginning  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  the  Prussians  first  adopted  as  a  permanent 
measure  universal  military  service,  which  revolutionized 
war,  making  armies  far  larger  and  war  more  tremendous 
and  costly.  In  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century 
the  rapidity  of  gun-fire  was  greatly  increased.  The 
Prussians  defeated  the  Austrians  at  Koniggratz  largely 
because  their  rifles  could  be  fired  much  faster;  and  in  the 
Franco-Prussian  war  the  French  had  even  a  better  one. 
During  the  same  time  artillery,  which  had  been  so  im- 


the  sea 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION        621 

portant  in  the  hands  of  Napoleon,  came  to  be  increasingly 
effective,  firing  explosive  shells  more  than  solid  balls, 
and  constantly  being  improved  in  range  and  rapidity  of 
fire.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  century  American  and 
French  inventors  developed  the  mitrailleuse  or  machine 
gim,  which  fired  vast  numbers  of  bullets  mechanically; 
and  by  1914  the  French  had  developed,  in  their  "seventy- 
fives,"  field  artillery  which  was  practically  rapid-fire  can- 
non. All  sorts  of  scientific  discoveries  and  all  sorts  of 
technical  devices  were  adapted  to  military  use.  Increas- 
ingly did  war  depend  upon  railroads,  machines,  chemicals, 
explosives,  and  gases.  Such  overwhelming  forces  were 
used  at  last  that  in  a  prolonged  conflict  men  destroyed 
the  wealth  and  civilization  of  ages,  and  might,  indeed, 
succeed  in  destroying  civilization  entirely. 

On  the  sea  also  warfare  was  greatly  altered.  Down  to  War  on 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  there  had  been 
no  fundamental  alteration  in  sea  war,  except  that  sails 
had  completely  displaced  oars,  galleys  giving  way  to 
frigates  and  ships  of  the  line,  and  that  the  artillery  was 
now  cannon  instead  of  bows  and  arrows.  In  the  first 
half  of  the  century  steam  partly  displaced  sails  as  the 
motive  force,  and  more  and  more,  shells  were  fired  from 
the  cannon.  The  great  change,  however,  came  at  the 
time  of  the  Crimean  War  when  the  French  used  ironclad 
vessels,  and  especially  in  1862,  when  the  appearance  of 
the  Merriviac  and  the  Monitor  showed  that  ironclads 
were  invincible  in  a  contest  with  the  old  wooden  ships, 
and  made  evident  the  lines  along  which  naval  architecture 
would  develop.  All  over  the  world  now  heavy  ironclad 
vessels  with  turrets  displaced  the  older  frigates.  At  the 
end  of  the  nineteenth  century,  inventors,  especially  in 
America,  developed  what  had  been  tried  for  a  hundred 
years,  and  perfected  the  submarine  or  under-water  vessel 
which  came  near  to  determining  the  outcome  of  the 
Great  War,  in  1917. 


622 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Study  of  the 
human  body 


Bacteriology 


Surgery 


These  instruments  of  destruction  did  not  give  the  pre- 
dominating character  to  a  scientific  age  which  was 
principally  constructive.  In  no  preceding  period  was  so 
much  done  to  make  men  healthful  and  happier  and  better. 
Down  to  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  only  a  little 
was  known  about  the  structure  and  working  of  the  human 
body,  and  little  about  the  diseases  which  beset  man's 
life.  Bleeding  was  still  the  general  and  sovereign  remedy, 
and  most  people  were  disposed  to  believe  that  sickness  was 
a  visitation  of  the  Lord,  to  be  accepted  and  endured.  In 
1801  a  Frenchman,  Bichat,  directed  attention  to  the  tis- 
sues of  the  body.  Many  investigators  studied  the  ap- 
pearance and  action  of  organs  diseased  and  in  health, 
and  presently  a  great  deal  was  known  about  the  heart, 
the  lungs,  and  the  kidneys.  As  the  century  went  on  an 
immense  field  was  opened  by  observation  and  experiment, 
and  many  of  the  best  students  became  specialists  in 
medicine,  devoting  themselves  to  the  study  and  treatment 
of  particular  diseases.  A  great  revolution  came  in  1861 
when  Pasteur,  a  Frenchman,  demolished  the  old  idea 
that  diseases  originated  spontaneously,  and  showed  that 
they  came  from  minute  living  organisms  which  he  called 
bacteria.  The  science  of  bacteriology,  carried  forward 
with  great  brilliancy  by  Pasteur  and  also  by  the  Germans 
Koch  and  Cohn  and  others,  made  it  possible  to  determine 
not  only  the  causes  of  many  of  the  worst  diseases,  but  also 
the  means  of  preventing  them;  and  by  the  end  of  the 
period  it  was  possible  by  taking  certain  precautions  to 
escape  very  largely  from  the  fevers  and  diseases  which 
had  often  scourged  mankind  as  plagues.  In  surgery  no 
less  memorable  results  were  attained.  Not  only  was 
knowledge  of  the  human  body  extended,  with  far  greater 
certainty  and  skill  than  ever  before,  but  about  1846,  fol- 
lowing the  work  of  several  experimenters,  anaesthesia 
was  introduced  by  an  American  doctor,  and  his  methods 
at  once  being  taken  up  everywhere,  a  great  part  of  the 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION 


pain  and  horror  of  operations  was  permanently  abolished. 
In  1876  an  Englishman,  Lord  Lister,  introduced  antisepsis, 
by  which,  as  the  result  of  precautions  taken  and  of  care 
to  kill  the  germs  which  the  operator  might  bring  to  the 
patient,  the  danger  of  infecting  the  patient  with  disease 
was  avoided. 

The  period  from  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  to 
the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  was  also  an  epoch  in  which 
literature,  music,  and  the  fine  arts  flourished  as  seldom 
before.  In  literature  there  had  been  no  greater  or  richer 
period  since  the  Renaissance.  Never  before  had  there 
been  so  much  writing,  and  seldom  so  much  good  writing. 
In  Spain,  in  Italy,  in  Holland,  in  Switzerland,  and  parts 
of  central  Europe,  where  the  greatest  periods  of  the  past 
were  not  equalled,  there  were  nevertheless  many  writers  of 
distinction.  In  England  the  nineteenth  century  was  the 
greatest  of  all  periods  in  her  literature  except  for  the  Eliza- 
bethan; and  in  France  except  for  the  classical  age  which 
began  about  the  time  of  Louis  XIV  and  ended  about  the 
time  of  the  Revolution.  It  was  the  greatest  period  also 
in  German  literature  and  the  foremost  of  her  writers, 
Goethe  and  Schiller  were  at  their  height  in  the  period  of 
the  Revolution  and  Napoleon.  In  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury appeared  the  most  important  writers  in  Scandinavian 
literature.  And  this  was  the  period  when  a  body  of  great 
Slavic  writers  for  the  first  time  made  Russian  literature 
splendid  and  renowned. 

There  was  no  kind  of  writing  that  was  not  done  and 
done  well :  poetry,  prose,  drama,  novel,  criticism,  historical 
composition.  But  altogether  the  tendencies  of  this  pe- 
riod conduced  to  prose  writing  rather  than  poetry;  along 
with  much  fine  original  work,  there  was  also  a  great  deal 
that  was  critical  and  descriptive;  and  as  the  sixteenth 
century  was  the  era  of  the  drama,  so  the  nineteenth  was 
especially  the  time  of  the  novel.  During  this  time  ro- 
manticism displaced  classicism;  afterward  a  balance  was 


Literature 


Leading 
tendencies 


624 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Classicism 


Roman- 
ticism 


struck  between  the  two;  then  individuals  followed  their 
own  ideals,  and  realism  or  naturalism  presently  gave  the 
character  to  great  pieces  of  fiction. 

In  the  eighteenth  century  the  literature  of  western  Eu- 
rope, notably  in  France  and  England  became  elegant, 
polished,  careful,  neat,  and  exact.  The  great  masters 
of  this  in  France  had  been  Racine  and  Boileau,  and  in 
England,  Addison  and  Pope  are  now  the  most  famous. 
To  the  authors  of  this  period  the  term  "classic"  is  often 
applied.  Certain  of  the  great  writers  of  Greece  and  Rome 
were  in  after-times  justly  considered  as  being  in  a  rank 
or  class  by  themselves,  so  that  they  themselves  were 
called  classic  and  their  works  referred  to  as  classics.  In 
their  compositions  had  been  especially  developed  the 
qualities  of  symmetry,  proportion,  purity,  refinement,  and 
restraint;  and  when  now  these  qualities  were  imitated  or 
developed  by  writers  in  western  Europe  in  the  period 
after  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century,  the  term 
classicism  was  used  to  define  the  spirit  of  the  writing  of 
this  age.  Some  of  the  finest  writing  in  modern  literature 
was  done  by  these  masters;  but  in  the  hands  of  a  host  of 
feeble  imitators  poetry  and  prose  tended  to  become 
artificial  and  stereotyped,  and  the  manner  more  important 
than  the  matter.  Finally  the  writing  became  lifeless 
and  artificial,  and  it  seemed  impossible  any  longer  to  do  in 
this  style  great  and  original  work. 

In  the  second  half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  however, 
there  was  a  great  reaction  from  this.  First  in  Germany, 
with  Herder,  Goethe  to  some  extent,  and  Schiller,  a  little 
later  in  England  with  Robert  Burns,  Wordsworth, 
Byron,  and  Sir  Walter  Scott,  and  after  the  Napoleonic 
period  in  France  especially  with  Victor  Hugo,  a  host  of 
writers  began  to  break  away  from  the  rules  and  restraints 
of  the  classical  school  and  give  free  rein  to  imagination 
and  passion,  using  such  forms  as  suited  them  best,  often 
going  to  the  Middle  Ages  for  their  themes,  and  writing 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION        625 


of  the  strange  and  the  wonderful.  This  movement  came 
to  be  known  as  romanticism.  Everywhere  it  was  charac- 
terized by  strength,  exuberance,  and  daring,  but  was 
presently  carried  to  excess,  and  provoked  a  reaction. 
Thereafter  writers  strove  to  use  for  their  own  purposes 
the  best  of  the  classic  and  the  best  of  the  romantic  styles. 

In  the  extraordinary  mass  of  European  writing  which 
filled  the  nineteenth  century  there  was  a  great  body  of 
splendid  poetry,  especially  in  England  and  France,  the 
greatest  names  being:  Byron,  Shelley,  Keats,  Browning, 
Tennyson,  Swinburne,  Hugo,  Lamartine  and  Beranger. 
Critical  writing  reached  the  highest  excellence  it 
had  attained  since  the  days  of  the  Greeks  especially  in 
the  work  of  Saint-Beuve,  Matthew  Arnold,  and  Georg 
Brandes,  the  Dane.  There  was  an  immense  body  of  his- 
torical writing,  less  distinguished  generally  for  literary 
excellence  than  exact  scholarship  and  profound  research. 
Modern  historical  writing,  indeed,  was  founded  about 
the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  by  Von  Ranke,  the 
great  German,  who  taught  that  it  should  be  based  upon 
the  sources  and  should  strive  to  tell  of  things  as  they  had 
happened.  Some  excellent  dramatic  writing  was  done, 
but  generally  what  men  of  the  sixteenth  century  would 
have  put  into  a  play,  men  of  the  nineteenth  put  into  nov- 
els. The  novel  began  in  the  eighteenth  century,  but  it 
became  the  greatest  of  all  literary  forms  in  the  nineteenth : 
in  England,  Scott,  Dickens,  Thackeray,  Meredith,  Steven- 
son, Hardy;  in  France,  Hugo,  Flaubert,  Balzac,  Zola; 
in  Germany,  Freytag,  Sudermann;  and  in  Russia,  Gogol, 
Turgeniev,  Dostoievsky,  and  Tolstoy.  The  realistic,  one 
of  the  most  distinctive  schools  of  novel  writing  developed 
especially  in  France,  where  Stendhal,  Balzac,  Flaubert,  and 
Zola  strove  to  find  the  highest  art  in  representing  things 
exactly  as  they  are. 

In  music  there  were  splendid  achievements,  in  Italy, 
in  France,  in  the  Slavic  countries — ^Bohemia,  Poland,  and 


Poetry 


Criticism 


Historical 
writing 


The  novel 


Realism 


Music:  the 
Germans 


626  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

Russia,  and  above  all  in  Germany  and  Austria.  Music 
is  the  greatest  contribution  which  the  Germans  have 
made  to  the  arts,  and  their  music  is  the  greatest  in  the 
world.  Of  their  three  foremost  composers,  Bach  had 
written  his  glorious,  stately  music  in  the  first  half  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  but  Beethoven,  greatest  of  them  all, 
composed  his  sonatas  in  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth, 
while  Brahms  did  his  work  two  generations  later.  This 
music  was  distinguished  not  only  by  its  marvellous  beauty, 
but  by  the  depth  and  vastness  which  have  generally  per- 
tained to  creations  of  the  Teutonic  mind.  In  the  nine- 
teenth century  also  Germany  and  Austria  gave  to  the 
world  the  greatest  writers  of  song,  Schubert,  Schumann, 
Brahms,  and  Franz.  About  the  middle  of  the  century 
Richard  Wagner  began  writing  that  magnificent  series 
of  operas  which  place  him  above  all  others  in  this  branch 
of  art.  Some  of  his  music  was  crude,  strange,  and  bar- 
baric, but  most  of  it  had  wondrous  beauty  and  a  depth 
and  suggestiveness  which  altogether  no  other  composer 
of  operas  has  equalled.  In  Italy  also  there  was  splendid 
writing  of  opera,  especially  by  Verdi,  as  there  was  in 
France;  while  at  the  end  of  the  century  Russia  took  from 
Germany  her  old  preeminence  in  musical  composition. 
Musical  The  music  at  the  beginning  of  the  period  was  in  the 

development     classical  style,  and  in  it  melody,  or  a  series  of  single  tones, 
was  the  important  thing.     It  was  homophonic,  character- 
^  ized  by  a  single  melody  or  by  one  which  was  strikingly  pre- 

dominant. Often  the  form  was  more  important  than  the 
content.  In  this  period  was  done  the  work  of  Haydn, 
Beethoven  and  Mozart.  Beethoven,  however,  marked 
the  transition  over  into  a  romantic  movement  in  music, 
as  in  his  Ninth  Symphonyy  though  he  retained  classical 
forms  somewhat  to  the  end.  The  romantic  movement 
was  much  advanced  by  the  songs  and  the  instrumental 
compositions  of  Schubert  and  especially  of  Schumann, 
in  which  the  content  was  now  far  more  important  than 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION        627 

the  form,  and  in  which  the  form  was  sometimes  much 
inferior  to  the  best  work  of  the  age  preceding.  Still  fur- 
ther was  this  carried  by  Chopin,  in  whose  romanticism 
new  forms  were  invented  for  the  purpose  of  expressing 
more  perfectly  meaning,  content,  and  powerful  emotion. 
The  Romantic  movement  in  music  culminated  in  Wagner. 
Whereas  in  such  operas  as  Don  Giovanni  or  Le  Nozze  di 
Figaro,  of  Mozart,  the  melodies  were  beautiful,  simple, 
and  brief,  in  the  greater  operas  of  Wagner,  like  Parzifal 
and  Tristan  und  Isolde,  they  were  long  and  not  exactly 
balanced,  as  they  would  have  been  in  the  classical  manner. 
Furthermore,  Wagner  gave  great  importance  to  har- 
monies, or  combinations  of  tones,  which  were  constantly 
made  more  and  more  complex.  Meanwhile,  however, 
Italians  like  Verdi  and  Frenchmen  like  Gounod,  in  such 
operas  as  Aida  and  Faust,  retained  much  of  classical  forms 
at  the  same  time  that  they  were  filled  with  the  romantic 
spirit. 

From  the  Romantic  school  came  more  modern  com-  Later 
posers,  who  developed  harmonies  still  further  than  Wag-  developm«.at 
ner  had  done,  using  old  ones  in  new  combinations,  which 
seemed  strange  and  novel,  as  indeed  Wagner  had  often 
done,  or  else  introducing  such  novelties  as  the  whole-tone 
scale,  which  was  employed  by  the  Frenchman  Debussy,  or, 
like  Scriabine,  making  entirely  new  harmonies  which 
seemed  to  the  ordinary  listener  to  be  discords,  and  so 
in  music  accomplishing  results  not  unlike  what  the  futur- 
ists attained  in  painting,  and  some  of  the  users  of  vers 
libre  achieved  in  poetical  writing.  During  the  latest 
generation,  however,  the  most  striking  work  was  often 
done  in  certain  national  schools,  at  a  time  when  na- 
tionalism was  becoming  the  most  potent  political  force 
in  Europe.  Such  was  the  work  of  Grieg  in  Norway,  of 
Dvorak  in  Bohemia,  of  Sibelius  in  Finland,  and  of  Tschai- 
kovsky  and  Rimski-Korsakov  in  Russia.  These  two 
last,  along  with  others  of  their  countrymen,  who  still 


628 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


carried  on  the  Romantic  traditions,  took  away  from  the 
Germans  primacy  in  the  world  of  music  and  put  it  in  the 
keeping  of  the  Slavonic  peoples. 

Architecture  In  architecture,  in  sculpture,  in  painting  also  a  great 
amount  of  work  was  done,  much  of  it  excellent,  though 
in  architecture  and  sculpture  the  nineteenth  century  was 
not  a  great  creative  period.  In  architecture  there  was  a 
series  of  revivals  of  older  styles,  Renaissance,  Gothic, 
Romanesque,  culminating  especially  in  what  is  known  as 
the  Italian  High  Renaissance,  of  which  a  good  example  is 
the  Opera  House  in  Paris.  The  great  architects  of  this 
period  modified  the  styles  they  copied  so  as  to  suit 
the  circumstances  with  which  they  were  dealing.  They 
also  worked  from  the  plan  of  their  structure  rather  than 
the  front  or  facade,  as  had  often  formerly  been  done; 
they  strove  to  express  in  the  appearance  of  their  buildings 
the  purpose  for  which  they  were  intended;  and  in  such 
well-known  structures  as  the  Eiffel  Tower  and  the  Grand 
Palais  in  Paris  they  successfully  tried  to  express  Renais- 
sance forms  in  the  new  materials,  steel  and  iron,  with 
which  they  were  working.  In  all  this,  as  in  sculpture  and 
painting.  Frenchmen  were  the  leaders,  and  Paris  became 
the  art  center  of  the  world.  But  in  the  early  part  of  the 
twentieth  century  the  Germans  ceased  to  copy  and  tried 
to  express  themselves  in  forms  which  they  now  developed. 
They  had  considerable  success  in  portraying  their  national 
character  and  ideals  in  such  structures  as  the  Bismarck 
monument  and  the  Victory  monument  at  Leipzig,  which 
reveal  stern,  stark  power  and  grim  reliance  upon  force 
and  strength. 

Sculpture  The  great  sculptors  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 

century,  such  as  the  Italian,  Canova,  and  the  Dane,  Thor- 
waldsen,  were  the  leaders  of  a  classical  revival,  seeking  to 
copy  exactly  the  forms  used  by  the  masters  in  ancient 
times.  Thus,  when  Napoleon  carried  the  statue  Apollo 
Belvedere  away  from  Rome,  Canova  executed  his  Perseu-s 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION 

to  take  its  place,  seeking  to  reproduce  in  his  creation  the 
classical  spirit  of  the  statue  just  lost.  From  this  classi- 
cism, as  in  literature,  there  was  presently  a  great  reaction, 
since  the  lesser  classicists  in  time  tended  to  expel  from 
their  art  all  passion  and  life.  The  great  leader  of  the 
Romantic  movement  which  followed  was  Rude,  who,  like 
Victor  Hugo  in  literature,  had  extraordinary  power  in 
expressing  energy  and  life,  as  in  his  group  of  the  Marseil- 
laise on  the  Arc  de  Triomphe.  After  a  while  again  re- 
action Kiame,  and  presently  individual  sculptors  strove 
to  assert  themselves  as  seemed  to  them  best.  The  most 
important  movements  at  the  end  of  the  century  were 
realism,  which  attempted  to  portray  objects  exactly  in 
their  details,  and  naturalism,  which  tried  to  produce  the 
effect  of  the  truth  without  giving  all  the  details.  Here 
the  great  masters  were  the  Frenchman  Rodin  and  Meun- 
ier,  the  Belgian,  this  latter  an  artist  whose  work  expressed 
profound  sympathy  with  the  working  classes. 

At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  painting  also  was  Painting 
dominated  by  the  classical  spirit,  shown  particularly  in 
the  work  of  David,  the  French  artist  of  Napoleon's  time, 
and  the  large  group  of  disciples  who  followed  him.  They 
made  drawing  and  outline  the  basis  of  their  art,  and  their 
paintings  were  often  little  more  than  colored  bas-reliefs, 
cold  and  artificial.  Their  work  provoked  a  passionate 
reaction  led  by  Gericault,  Delacroix,  and  others,  who 
expressed  tumultuous  passion  and  emotion,  depending 
upon  color,  light  and  shade,  rather  than  mere  drawing. 
But  the  French  spirit  of  moderation  and  good  judgment 
again  asserted  itself,  and  after  a  while  a  balance  was 
struck  between  the  two  forces.  In  the  second  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century  many  particular  schools  arose.  In 
this  period  landscape  painting  at  last  assumed  a  position 
of  great  importance.  Poussin  and  Claude  Lorraine  in 
France,  and  great  Dutch  artists  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, had  done  excellent  work,  but  landscape  painting 


63#  fi¥li#PJS,    17S9-1#1«I 

became  one  of  the  great  movements  in  art  in  the  nineteenth 
century,  led  especially  by  Constable  and  Turner  in  Eng- 
land, and  followed  by  Rousseau,  Daubigny  and  Corot 
m  France.  In  the  same  period  Millet  developed  the  por* 
trayal  of  peasant  life,  and  Rosa  Bonheur  painted  pictures 
of  cattle.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  century,  in  painting  as 
in  literature  and  sculpture,  the  naturalists  tried  to  depict 
things  as  they  are,  this  movement  being  led  especially 
by  Courbet.  Presently  this  movement  became  domin- 
ant. Impressionism,  the  portrayal  of  an  impression  and 
the  essentials  of  the  appearance  of  an  object  rather  than 
the  exact  details,  was  also  an  important  development.  Of 
this  the  great  masters  were  the  Frenchmen  Manet,  Renoir, 
Degas  and  Monet,  and  the  American  Whistler.  In  their 
work  there  is  particular  interest  in  light  and  shade.  The 
works  of  the  old  masters  were  generally  dark  and  low  in 
tone;  but  the  works  of  these  moderns  are  high  in  tone 
and  bright.  The  period  just  before  the  war  saw  the  de- 
velopment of  post-impressionism,  cubism,  symbolism, 
futurism,  all  of  which  were  revolts  against  the  older  art, 
and  against  a  mere  imitation  of  the  objects  painted,  and 
were  a  striving  to  discover  new  methods  of  expression, 
much  as  in  literature  the  writers  of  free  verse  were  trying. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  century  of  progress:  F.  S.  Marvin,  The  Living  Pasty  a 
Sketch  of  Western  Progress  (3d  ed.  1918),  deals  with  the  principal 
changes  from  the  ancient  period  to  the  time  of  the  Industrial 
Revolution,  The  Century  of  Hope:  a  Sketch  of  Western  Progress 
from  1815  to  the  Great  War  (2d  ed.  1920),  Recent  Developments  in 
European  Thought  (1920),  edited  by  the  same  author;  A.  R. 
Wallace,  The  Wonderful  Century:  Its  Successes  and  Its  Failures 
(1898),  The  Progress  of  the  Century  (1901),  by  the  same  author, 
and  many  others. 

History  of  science:  W.  Libby,  An  Introduction  to  the  History 
of  Science  (1917);  Sir  Oliver  Lodge,  Pioneers  of  Science  (1893); 
H.  S.  Williams,  A  HisUyry  of  Science,  10  vols.  (1904-10). 


EUROPEAN  CIVILIZATION        631 

Literature:  G.  Pellissier,  Le  Mouvement  LitUraire  au  XIX^ 
SQch  (ed.  1912);  George  Saintsbury,  A  History  of  Nineteenth 
Century  Literature,  1780-1895  (1912);  G.  H.  Mair,  Modern  Eng- 
lish Literature  (1911),  an  excellent  brief  account;  H.  Walker, 
The  Literature  of  the  Victorian  Era  (1913);  Irving  Babbitt, 
The  Masters  of  Modern  French  Criticism  (1912) ;  Rene  Doumic, 
Histoire  de  la  Litterature  Frangaise  (24th  ed.  1907) ;  G.  Lanson, 
Histoire  de  la  Litterature  Frangaise  (ed.  1916);  Kuno  Franke, 
A  History  of  German  Literature  as  Determined  by  Social  Forces 
(ed.  1901);  F.  Kummer,  Deutsche  Literaturgeschichte  des  Neun- 
zehnten  Jahrhunderts  (1909) ;  German  Culture:  the  Contribution  of 
the  Germans  to  Knowledge,  Literature,  Art,  and  Life  (1915),  by- 
British  writers,  edited  by  W.  P.  Paterson;  L.  CoUison-Morley, 
(Modem  Italian  Literature)  (1912);  H.  Hauvette,  LittSrature 
Italienne  (1906);  A,  Bruckner,  A  Literary  History  of  Russia 
trans,  by  H.  Havelock  (1908);  Vicomte  E.-M.  de  Vogue,  The 
Russian  Novel,  Enghsh  translation  from  the  11th  French  edi- 
tion by  Col.  H.  A.  Sawyer  (1914). 

Music  and  art:  Gustav  Kobbe,  How  to  Appreciate  Music 
(1906),  contains  some  simple  but  excellent  accounts  of  the 
history  of  modern  music;  General  History  of  Art,  a  series  of  vol- 
umes pertaining  to  the  development  of  art  in  particular 
districts  or  countries,  of  which  Louis  Hourticq,  The  History 
of  Art  in  France  (1911)  is  excellent. 


CHAPTER    XV 

SOCIAL    AND    INTELLECTUAL 
CHANGES 

Evolution  is  an  integration  of  matter  and  concomitant  dissipation 
of  motion;  during  which  the  matter  passes  from  an  indefinite,  in- 
coherent homogeneity  to  a  definite,  coherent  heterogeneity;  and 
during  which  the  retained  motion  undergoes  a  parallel  transforma- 
tion. 
Herbert  Spencer  A  System  of  Synthetic  Philosophy:  /,  First 
Principles  (1862),  paragraph  145. 

Humana  ratio,  nullo  prorsus  Dei  respectu  habito,  imicus  est  veri  ct 
falsi,  boni  et  mali  arbiter,  sibi  ipsi  est  lex  et  naturalibus  sui^  viribus 
ad  hominum  ac  populorum  bonum  curandum  suflBcit. 

Syllabus  complectens  pr(scipiu)s  nostrcie  cBtaiis  errores    .     .     .     Pit 
papcB  IX  (1864). 

Make  no  mistake  about  it    .     .     .    Democracy  is  going  to  rule  in 
these  countries. 
Michael  Davitt,  letter  to  Freeman's  Journal,  January  22, 1906. 

An  era  During  the  period  between  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth 

of  change        century  and  the  years  just  prior  to  the  Great  War  immense 
'  changes  took  place  in  the  relations  of  people  with  each 

other,  with  their  governments,  with  capitalists  and  em- 
ployers, in  the  attitude  of  people  toward  the  problems  of 
the  world  in  which  they  lived,  and  in  their  habits  of 
thought.  In  no  previous  epoch  of  the  world's  history  did 
so  vast  a  number  of  people  go  through  such  large  trans- 
formation. 
Education  At  the  time  of  the  French  Revolution  it  is  probable  that 

in  the  most  progressive  countries  not  more  than  a  quarter 
of  the  people  could  read  and  write,  and  for  all  of  Europe 


CHANGES 


63d 


j^imes. 


an 


Bible  seemed  to  declare  that  all  things  were  suddenly 
created  in  six  days,  geologists  taught  that  the  world  had 
been  slowly  evolving  for  more  than  100,000,000  years; 
where  most  people  had  believed  that  man  had  existed  for 
6,000  years,  scientists  now  asserted  that  he  had  been  on 
the  earth  for  more  than  100,000;  and  many  believed  that 
human  beings  had  gradually  been  evolved  from  lower 
animals,  and  these  from  reptiles,  and  these  from  fishes, 
and  so  on  back  to  the  lowest  living  forms  in  primeval 
Many  people  now  felt  that  the  very  basis  of  their 
lith  was  being  shaken,  since  they  had  long  been  taught  to 
T^cept  all  the  Bible  as  inspired  and  its  declarations  as  liter- 
.1  y  true.  Hence  arose  a  painful  conflict  between  science 
.  ^id  religion,  in  which  evolutionists  and  men  of  science 
.  ,irere  considered  atheists  and  blasphemers;  but  after  some 
time  many  people  were  able  to  adjust  their  beliefs  and 
modify  their  conceptions,  so  that  religion  and  science  were 
reconciled  for  them. 

For  the  Churches,  then,  the  nineteenth  century  was  a 
strange,  wondrous  time.  In  the  past,  religion  had  been  the 
greatest  of  all  intellectual  forces,  embodying  science, 
philosophy,  explanation  of  the  present,  and  hope  of  the 
future.  In  the  Middle  Ages  the  Christian  Church  was 
the  most  important  of  all  the  agents  of  civilization  and 
progress.  In  the  nineteenth  century  the  three  parts  of 
Christianity  in  Europe  met  the  changes  of  their  time  with 
varying  fortune. 

Least  affected  for  a  long  while  was  the  Orthodox,  or 
Greek  Catholic  Church  of  the  east,  which  counted  among 
its  adherents  most  of  the  Russians,  the  Greeks,  and  most 
of  the  South  Slavs  of  the  Balkan  country.  This  church, 
largely  controlled  by  the  Russian  government  and  working 
in  obedience  to  the  Tsar,  had  long  gone  on  unwavering 
course,  with  ancient  ritual,  and  ceremonies  of  the  past, 
little  troubled  by  revolts  from  within,  and  untouched  by 
influences  from  without.     There  had  been  no  period  of 


The 

Churches 
and  the 
changing 
time 


The  Greek 

Catholic 

Church 


640  EUROPE,    1789-1920 

the  Reformation  in  Russia;  and  there  was  no  considerable 
body  of  communicants  who  had  left  it.  As  the  Russian 
people  had  remained  off  on  one  side  of  Europe,  out  of  the 
great  currents  which  were  steadily  changing  the  other 
people,  so  had  their  church  been  remote  and  it  remained 
unaffected.  In  the  nineteenth  century  it  was  generally 
followed  and  obeyed  by  the  people,  whose  national  con- 
sciousness it  fostered,  and  who  were  proud  of  its  greatness 
and  its  past.  The  ideas  of  the  evolutionists,  like  the  teach- 
ings of  liberals  and  social  reformers,  made  no  impression 
on  the  great  body  of  Russian  peasants,  without  education > 
and  with  the  intellectual  outlook  of  medieval  times. 
Whatever  might  be  the  attitude  of  the  upper  classes,  most 
of  the  Russian  people  continued  to  be  simple-minded 
peasants,  cherishing  the  ikons  or  images  which  they  had 
in  their  homes,  and  crossing  themselves  devoutly  as  they 
passed  by  the  shrines  or  the  churches.  Throughout  the 
nineteenth  century,  as  for  a  long  time  before,  the  Russian 
Church  was  powerfully  supported  by  the  state.  But  dur- 
ing the  time  of  the  Revolution  which  followed  the  Great 
War  and  overthrew  the  government  of  the  Tsar,  the 
Church  went  down  with  the  rest  of  the  old  order,  as  in 
France  during  the  French  Revolution.  Church  lands  and 
property  were  confiscated,  and  some  of  the  priests  and 
higher  officials  murdered  or  shamefully  treated.  But  as 
the  Orthodox  faith  had  been  the  religion  of  the  Russian 
^  people  for  ages,  it  was  probable  that  the  subsidence  of  the 
Revolution  would  see  it  resume  its  place  as  the  religion  of 
Russia. 
The  Roman         The  Roman  Catholic  Church  passed  through  vicissi- 

Catholic  tudes  much  greater.     In  several  countries  it  was  deprived 

Church  ..  ,  .  i>    t      -r\ 

of  its  property;  the  territory  of  the  Popes  was  taken  from 

them;  one  Pope  was  carried  off  as  a  prisoner  by  Napoleon; 
and  after  1870  the  Pontiffs  regarded  themselves  as  "pri- 
soners'* in  the  Vatican  Palace.  Moreover,  the  popula- 
tions of  central  and  western  Europe,  in  the  midst  of  which 


CHANGES 


641 


the  Church  was  established,  were  far  more  enlightened  than 
those  of  the  eastern  lands,  and  its  adherents  were  in 
much  closer  contact  with  the  great  changes  in  science  and 
culture  and  much  more  affected  by  them.  The  Western 
Church,  therefore,  had  to  encounter  new  ideas  which 
threatened  to  undermine  and  weaken  its  power. 

The  Catholic  Church  was  affected  by  the  French  Revo- 
lution much  more  than  the  Protestant  Churches,  for  the 
effects  of  the  Revolution  were  greater  and  lasted  longer  in 
Catholic  countries.  During  the  Revolution  the  lands  of 
the  Church  were  confiscated  in  France.  A  far  more  terrible 
blow  was  struck  when  the  extreme  revolutionists  of  the 
period  of  the  Terror,  suppressed  the  Christian  religion  and 
closed  the  churches,  and  then  proclaimed  the  worship  of 
Reason.  A  reaction  followed,  however,  and  the  care  of 
Napoleon  to  respect  Christianity  and  give  it  the  protec- 
tion of  the  government  was  one  of  the  bases  of  his  power 
in  France.  In  1801  he  made  with  Pius  VII  the  famous 
Concordat',  but  with  this  Pope  he  soon  came  into  conflict. 
After  Austerlitz  he  was  supreme  in  Italy  and  did  there  as 
he  pleased.  He  soon  required  the  Pope  to  join  in  the  block- 
ade of  England;  after  a  bitter  dispute,  in  1809,  he  annexed 
Rome  and  the  Papal  State  to  his  empire,  and  replied  to 
an  excommunication  by  casting  the  Pope  into  prison. 
Napoleon  then  for  a  short  time  made  good  the  ideal  of  the 
greatest  medieval  emperors,  and  did  what  the  Protestant 
princes  had  done  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation ;  he  con- 
sidered himself  to  be  head  of  the  empire  and  superior  to  the 
Church,  with  the  Pope  subordinate  and  dependent.  Not 
since  the  time  of  the  Babylonian  Captivity,  in  the  four- 
teenth century,  when  the  Popes  resided  at  Avignon,  had 
papal  authority  been  so  much  lowered. 

But  all  this  soon  came  to  an  end,  and  after  the  Congress 
of  Vienna  the  Church  recovered.  The  ecclesiastical  prop- 
erty which  had  been  confiscated  in  France  was  not  re- 
stored, but  the  gifts  of  pious  people  founded  a  new  wealth 


The 

Revolution 
and 
Napoleon 


Recovery 
after  1815 


642 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


Changing 
times 


Scepticism 
and  critical 
attitude 


for  it.  Everywhere  in  Catholic  countries  during  this 
period  of  restoration  and  reaction  people  remembered  that 
the  Church  had  been  attacked  at  the  same  time  that  so 
many  other  venerable  institutions  were  cast  down,  and  the 
ruling  classes  believed  that  the  worst  excesses  of  the  radi- 
cals and  revolutionists  would  not  have  been  possible  except 
that  religion  and  the  Church  had  been  abandoned.  So  it 
seemed  well  for  the  priests  to  have  their  old  influence  with 
the  people;  education  was  put  into  their  hands;  and  they 
were  supported  by  the  government,  which,  in  return,  got 
from  them  faithful  support. 

But  after  all,  it  was  not  so  much  the  work  of  Hebert  or 
Napoleon  as  the  great  ideas  of  the  Revolution  which  were 
dangerous  to  the  old  faith  and  especially  to  the  temporal 
power  of  the  Church.  Civil  and  religious  freedom  and 
equality  made  people  different  from  what  they  had  been. 
During  the  years  that  followed,  other  great  transforma- 
tions also  changed  men's  minds.  The  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion made  different  conditions  of  life  and  gradually  different 
ways  of  thinking.  Soon  it  produced  socialism,  which 
during  the  remainder  of  the  century  had  greater  and 
greater  effect  upon  the  outlook  of  people  in  the  lower  as 
well  as  in  the  upper  classes,  and  from  the  first  the  teachings 
of  the  socialists  made  men  ill-disposed  to  follow  without 
question  the  old  doctrines  of  the  Churches.  During  the 
same  time  also  great  inventions  and  strange  discoveries 
laid  the  foundation  for  an  entirely  different  way  of  looking 
at  things,  which  made  it  impossible  for  some  people  longer 
to  believe  what  their  fathers  had  received  without  question. 

Increasingly  people  were  learning  to  read  and  write, 
and  were  thus  brought  more  easily  to  a  knowledge  of  the 
wonderful  experiments  and  discoveries  taking  place  and 
the  consequent  alterations  in  human  knowledge.  More 
and  more  they  required  reasons  for  what  they  were  asked 
to  believe,  and  asked  for  the  proofs  of  what  was  submitted. 
Discoveries  in  the  realms  of  biology,  chemistry,  and  phy- 


CHANGES 


643 


sics  explained  an  immense  number  of  things  and  promised 
to  explain  many  more,  and  in  com*se  of  time  the  people 
who  understood  the  work  of  Lyell  and  Darwin,  or  read  the 
explanations  of  Comte,  Spencer,  or  Haeekel,  came  to  con- 
ceive of  things  in  terms  of  science,  where  before  they  had 
believed  what  was  taught  as  a  matter  of  faith.  These 
people  or  their  teachers  began  to  subject  the  Bible  to 
"higher  criticism"  just  as  they  would  examine  the  texts 
of  Shakespeare  or  Virgil,  to  investigate  the  history  of  re- 
ligion in  the  same  manner  that  they  studied  the  origins 
of  feudalism  or  the  rise  of  parliament  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
and  to  doubt  or  reject  many  things  which  the  Church  had 
said  must  be  believed. 

All  the  Churches  of  western  Europe  had  to  encounter 
this  spirit  increasingly  in  the  century  after  the  French 
Revolution,  and  all  of  them  were  shaken  by  it.  The 
Roman  Catholic  Church  met  the  situation  as  it  always 
had  in  the  past.  The  doctrines  which  it  taught  were 
considered  to  be  divinely  inspired  and  unalterably  true. 
Circumstances  in  the  world  round  about  might  change 
and  science  bring  revelation  and  discoveries,  but  always 
the  teachings  of  the  Church  remained  true  as  they  had 
been  from  the  first,  and  were  to  be  entirely  accepted  by 
the  faithful.  Accordingly,  as  the  gap  widened  between 
what  had  been  of  old  and  what  the  French  Revolution 
was  producing,  between  the  old  industrial  organization 
and  the  results  of  the  Industrial  Revolution,  between  the 
teachings  of  the  fathers  of  the  Church  and  the  new  ideas 
taught  by  the  socialists,  between  the  stories  contained  in 
the  Bible  and  the  conclusions  of  scientific  scholars,  Cath- 
olic populations  generally  fell  into  two  parts:  the  upper 
intellectual  classes,  with  better  education,  who  either 
abandoned  their  religion  or  remained  Catholics  merely 
in  name;  and  the  larger  body  of  the  poor,  the  humble,  and 
the  simple,  who  clung  to  priests  and  the  Church  as  their 
fathers  and  their  mothers  before  them. 


Rome 
and  the 
new  spirit 


644 


EUROPE,    1789-1920 


Tht 

Syllabua 
of  ErrorSf 
1864 


Papal  In- 
fallibility, 
1870 


Modernism 


The  Roman  Catholic  Church  was  far  from  remaining  a 
passive  spectator  of  the  conflict  thus  going  on.  Generally 
speaking  it  supported  the  best  of  the  old  order  and  op- 
posed revolutions  and  changes;  it  favored  monarchies 
rather  than  republics;  it  opposed  socialism,  and  set  itself 
sternly  against  "free  thinking"  or  attempts  to  comprom- 
ise with  the  new  knowledge.  In  1864  Pius  IX  issued  the 
encyclical  (circular  letter)  Quanta  Cura  and  at  the  same 
time  a  Syllabus  (collection)  of  Errors,  which  upheld  rigidly 
the  old  contentions  of  the  Church  and  condemned  all  who 
tended  toward  free  thinking,  religious  liberty,  or  any 
diminution  of  the  authority  of  the  Church  by  abolishing 
ecclesiastical  courts,  by  making  the  clergy  less  subordinate 
to  Rome,  by  establishing  lay  marriages,  and  putting 
education  under  laymen's  control.  Six  years  later,  at 
the  Council  of  the  Vatican  (1869-70),  the  first  general 
council  which  had  assembled  since  the  Council  of  Trent 
concluded  its  sessions  in  1563,  the  doctrine  of  the  Immacu- 
late Conception  of  the  Virgin  was  proclaimed,  and  the 
doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility  announced.  The  Vatican 
Council  declared  it  to  be  divinely  revealed  that  whenever 
the  Pope  spoke,  as  Pope,  with  resp>ect  to  the  aif  airs  of  the 
Church,  he  spoke  without  liabiHty  to  error,  and  that 
whoever  contradicted  him  was  anathema,  accursed.  In 
an  age  when  philosophy  and  science  were  making  so  many 
people  increasingly  doubtful  about  absolute  truth  in  any- 
thing, such  a  doctrine  seemed  out  of  accord  with  the  times, 
and  some  Catholics  refused  to  accept  it;  but  so  far  as  they 
remained  in  the  Church  their  resistance  was  soon  aban- 
doned. At  the  end  of  the  century  the  so-called  Mod- 
ernists, who  strove  to  "modernize"  to  some  extent  the 
dogmas  of  the  Church  and,  as  they  thought,  bring  them 
more  into  accord  with  the  knowledge  of  the  times,  were 
successfully  opposed  and  also  suppressed. 

In  1870  came  the  loss  of  the  States  of  the  Church.  Pius 
IX  opposed  this  to  the  utmost,  but  many  Catholics  came 


S2.    EUJ 


1920 


CHANGES 


645 


to  believe  that  the  Papacy  was  strengthened  rather  than 
weakened  by  being  free  now  to  devote  itself  entirely  to 
spiritual  labors;  and  actually  the  beginning  of  the  twen- 
tieth century  saw  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  after 
having  passed  through  the  vicissitudes  of  a  marvellous 
time,  and  after  sustaining  not  a  few  great  disasters  and 
defeats,  still  great  and  respected,  still  strong  in  the  af- 
fection of  a  multitude  of  people,  and  still  continuing  a 
great  work  which  it  had  been  carrying  on  for  ages. 

Of  the  Protestant  Churches  during  the  same  period  there 
is  less  to  be  said.  No  one  of  them  presented  so  striking  or 
so  powerful  an  organization  as  either  the  Greek  Catholic 
or  the  Roman  Catholic  Churches.  Protestant  creeds  were 
professed  in  the  most  powerful  countries  of  Europe,  but  the 
character  and  organization  of  their  churches  was  such  that 
they  could  not  play  the  great  part  in  politics  and  inter- 
national relations  assumed  by  the  Pope.  The  teachings 
of  Luther  and  other  Protestant  leaders  had  been  such  that 
when  the  churches  of  the  Reformation  were  established, 
they  were  put  under  the  control  of  the  state,  and  after  that 
time  the  Lutheran  Church  in  Prussia  and  the  Anglican 
Church  in  England,  had  remained  great  and  wealthy,  but 
passive  and  obedient  in  their  established  position.  In  the 
nineteenth  century  they  strove,  like  the  Catholic  Churchy 
to  hold  to  the  privileges  and  the  teachings  they  had  long 
maintained.  They  also  had  to  meet  the  changes  in  life 
and  thought  which  arose  during  this  time,  and  their  ad- 
herents also  were  often  torn  by  struggle  between  the  old 
beliefs  and  the  new  revelations  of  science.  Notwith- 
standing that  many  Protestant  ministers  regarded  Dar- 
win and  Haeckel  as  atheists  and  accursed,  and  notwith- 
standing that  the  Protestant  Churches  also  regarded  their 
own  dogmas  as  unquestionably  true  and  not  liable  to 
change,  yet  in  the  case  of  Protestants  it  was  often  less  dif- 
ficult to  reconcile  science  with  religion,  for  Protestantism, 
in  spite  of  itself,  had  always  tended  toward  freedom  of 


Continuing 
greatness 
of  the 
Church 


The 

Protestant 

Churches 


646  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

thought.  The  early  Protestants  had  no  idea  whatever 
of  permitting  religious  freedom;  but  they  had  broken 
away  from  the  Roman  Catholic  Church;  what  they  had 
done  others  afterward  did  more  easily;  and  not  only 
were  many  new  Protestant  sects  founded,  but  within  the 
Protestant  sects  many  individuals  tended  more  and  more 
to  the  belief  that  each  person  might  be  his  own  judge. 
A  great  many  Protestants,  therefore,  were  less  under  the 
authority  of  the  heads  of  their  Church,  and  more  in  the 
habit  of  judging  for  themselves.  Accordingly,  after  some 
struggle,  many  of  them  modified  their  religious  beliefs 
so  as  to  bring  them,  as  they  thought,  in  conformity 
with  the  new  teachings  of  philosophy  and  science;  and 
in  course  of  time  a  considerable  number  of  the  ministers 
and  leaders  did  this  also.  Hence,  while  the  Greek  Catholic 
Church  had  been  little  afiPected  by  Modernism,  and  the 
Roman  Catholic  Chm*ch  had  expelled  the  Modernist 
leaders  or  suppressed  them,  within  the  Protestant 
Chiu-ches  a  considerable  amount  of  readjustment  went  on; 
old  forms  were  changed  or  abandoned,  old  beliefs  quietly 
altered  or  dropped,  and  many  new  ideas  concerning  the 
age  of  the  earth,  creation,  miracles,  hell,  and  other 
things  accepted.  Where  Catholicism  either  held  its  ad- 
herents strictly  or  lost  them  altogether.  Protestantism 
had  less  authority  and  control  but  also  less  trouble. 
Desire  for  During  this  period  a  spirit  of  humanity  and  kindness 

improve-  developed  further  and  more  greatly  than  ever  before  in 

the  history  of  the  world.  Never  had  there  been  so  much 
desire  to  help  people  and  make  things  better.  Secialists 
strove  for  a  completely  new  order  and  organization  which 
would  make  all  people  happier,  they  said;  but  meanwhile 
there  was  more  and  more  belief  that  governments  should 
assist  and  protect  their  people,  as  they  had  done  before 
the  era  of  laissez-faire;  and  this  doctrine  bore  fruit  in 
many  European  countries  in  laws  to  protect  workers, 
insure  them  against  accident  and  sickness,  and  guarantee 


ment 


CHANGES 


647 


to  them  employment  and  minimum  wages.  In  all  of  this 
the  more  advanced  European  countries  were  far  ahead  of 
the  United  States. 

Meanwhile  many  old  horrors  had  passed  away  and 
were  almost  forgotten.  Down  to  the  time  of  the  French 
Revolution  there  was  scarcely  a  European  country  except 
Great  Britain  where  torture  might  not  be  employed  and 
where  death  was  not  given  with  torment,  as  when  men 
were  broken  on  the  wheel.  Substantially  the  Revolution- 
ary era  brought  an  end  to  barbarous  punishments  and 
barbarous  procedure.  During  this  time  also  punishments 
were  made  less  severe  and  the  death  penalty  inflicted  for 
fewer  crimes.  During  the  eighteenth  century  and  earlier 
most  prisons  were  loathsome  and  horrible  places.  Many 
of  them  continued  to  be  terrible  enough,  but  gradually 
there  was  considerable  improvement.  Finally,  in  all  re- 
spects there  was  greater  consideration  from  men  for 
women,  greater  kindness  to  children,  and  even  for  animals 
greater  kindness  and  mercy. 

It  was  in  accordance  with  this  spirit  that  while  the 
nineteenth  century  saw  the  establishment  of  great  armies 
and  the  rise  of  militarism  as  never  before,  it  was  also  during 
this  time  that  men  made  the  most  important  efforts 
so  far  undertaken  to  mitigate  war  or  end  it  completely. 
Tsar  Alexander  I  sincerely  hoped  to  bring  better  condi- 
tions when  he  proposed  his  Holy  Alliance.  In  1856,  at 
the  Congress  of  Paris,  the  signatories  agreed  to  abolish 
privateering,  and  so  lessened  the  evils  of  war  upon  the  sea, 
and,  until  1914,  made  sea  war  less  troublesome  to  neutrals. 
In  1864  an  international  convention  was  held  at  Geneva, 
for  the  purpose  of  mitigating  avoidable  suffering  in  war, 
and  as  a  result  the  Red  Cross  Society  was  established, 
Gradually  the  governments  drew  up  codes  or  bodies  of 
rules  by  which  they  would  abide  when  carrying  on  war, 
and  some  of  the  greatest  horrors  and  severities  of  the  past 
were  avoided  by  the  more  civilized  powers,  though  the 


Humani- 
tarianism 


Efforts  tQ 

mitigate 

war 


s^ 


The  Hague 
Peace  Con- 
ferences 


■¥. 


EUROPE,   1789-1920 


russians  acted  with  great  ruthlessness  in  France  in  1871, 
as  they  did  there  forty-three  years  later. 

More  important  still,  in  1898  Tsar  Nicholas  II  invited 
the  nations  to  consider  the  project  of  disarming.  As  he 
truly  declared,  increasing  armaments  and  the  expenses 
entailed  threatened  the  destruction  of  European  civiliza- 
tion. In  the  next  year  what  was  known  as  the  First 
Peace  Conference  assembled  at  The  Hague.  The  German 
representative  declared  that  in  his  country  the  army  was 
no  burden;  and  it  was  not  possible  to  agree  upon  any 
scheme  of  reduction;  but  a  permanent  court  of  arbitration 
known  as  the  Hague  Tribunal,  was  established,  to  deal,  at 
the  request  of  powers  concerned,  with  differences  which 
they  had  been  unable  to  settle  by  diplomatic  negotiation. 
In  1907  a  second  Peace  Conference  met  at  The  Hague. 
There  was  a  larger  attendance,  and  stronger  efforts  were 
now  made  to  substitute  peaceable  arbitration  for  war, 
and  so  make  possible  the  reduction  of  armaments.  Again 
there  was  no  success,  and  it  was  afterward  stated  that 
from  Germany  came  the  most  effective  opposition.  A 
body  of  conventions  was  drawn  up  to  regulate  the  conduct 
of  war  and  forbid  certain  barbarous  methods  and  certain 
terrible  devices,  like  poisonous  gases.  These  conventions 
were  adopted,  but  again  Germany  made  no  actual  change 
in  the  stern  and  terrible  regulations  contained  in  her 
Kriegsbrauch  im  Landkriege  (usages  in  war),  which  had 
been  issued  five  years  before.  The  Hague  Conferences 
accomplished  little,  but  they  are  the  principal  monument 
to  the  Russian  ruler  who  afterward  perished  so  miserably 
as  a  result  of  war.  And  they  were  afterward  seen  to 
have  been  preliminary  steps  toward  the  forming  of  a 
league  of  nations  to  abolish  all  war. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Education:  H.  B.  Binns,  A  Century  of  Education,  1808-1908 
(1908);  R.  E.  Hughes,  The  Making  of  Citizens:  a  Study  in  Com- 


CHANGES  649 

parative  Educatwn  (1902),  with  reference  to  Great   Britain, 
France,  Germany,  and  the  United  States. 

The  Women's  Movement:  E.  R.  Hecker,  Short  History  of 
Woman's  Rights  (1910);  J.  S.  Mill,  The  Subjection  of  Women 
(1869,  new  ed.  1911);  Mary  WoUstonecraft,  A  Vindication  of 
the  Rights  of  Women  (1792,  ed.  1891);  Katherine  Anthony, 
Feminism  in  Germany  and  Scandinavia  (1915);  Lily  Braun, 
Die  Frauenfrage  (1910) ;  Ferdinand  Buisson,  Le  Vote  des  Femmes 
(1911);  Millicent  G.  Fawcett,  Women's  Suffrage  (1912),  excel- 
lent short  account  of  the  movement  in  Great  Britain;  B.  L. 
Hutchins,  Women  in  Modern  Industry  (1915);  Ellen  Key,  trans, 
by  M.  B.  Borthwick,  The  Woman  Movement  (1912);  EmmeUne 
Pankhurst,  The  Suffragette  (1912);  Olive  Schreiner,  Women  and 
Labour  (1911). 

Evolution:  H.  F.  Osborn,  From  the  Greeks  to  Darwin  (1894), 
for  a  brief  account  of  the  development  of  the  doctrine;  G.  F. 
Romanes,  Darwin  and  after  Darwin^  3  vols.  (1906-10);  Charles 
Darwin,  On  the  Origin  of  Species  by  Means  of  Natural  Selection 
(1859),  The  Descent  of  Man  (1871),  Life  and  Letters  of  Charles 
Darwin,  edited  by  Francis  Darwin,  2  vols.  (1887) ;  James  Mar- 
chant,  Alfred  Russet  Wallace,  Letters  and  Reminiscences,  2  vols. 
(1916);  R.  C.  Punnett,  Mendelism  (3d  ed.  1911). 

Rationalism  and  freedom  of  thought:  J.  T.  Merz,  A  History 
of  European  Thought  in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  4  vols.  (1896- 
1914),  excellent;  J.  M.  Robertson,  A  Short  History  of  Free 
Thought  (3d  ed.  1915);  A.  W.  Benn,  The  History  of  English  Ra- 
tionalism in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  2  vols.  (1906);  A.  C.  McGif- 
fert.  The  Rise  of  Modern  Religious  Ideas  (1915). 

Roman  Catholicism :  William  Barry,  The  Papacy  and  Modern 
Times  (1911);  Joseph  MacCaffrey,  History  of  the  Catholic  Church 
in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  2  vols.  (1910),  by  a  Roman  Catholic; 
Fredrik  Nielsen,  trans,  from  the  Danish  by  A.  J.  Mason,  His- 
tory of  the  Papacy  in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  2  vols.  (1906), 
scholarly,  but  from  the  Lutheran  point  of  view  of  its  author;  G, 
Weill,  HisUnre  du  Catholicisme  LibSral  en  France,  1828-1908 
(1909) ;  Great  Encyclical  Letters  of  Leo  XIII,  trans,  edited  by  J. 
J.  Wynne  (1903).  Modern  papal  decrees,  encyclicals,  and  bulls 
are  to  be  found  in  La  Civilta  Cattolica  (1850-8). 

Protestantism:  F.  W.  Cornish,  A  History  of  the  Church  of 
England  in  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1910),  best  on  the  subject; 
H.  W.  Clark,  History  of  English  Nonconformity  (1913). 

Religion    and    social   development:    William    Cunningham, 


650  EUROPE,   1789-1920 

Christianity  and  Social  Questions  (1910),  Christianity  and  Poli" 
tics  (1915);  Joseph  Husslein,  The  Church  and  Social  Problems 
(1914). 

Social  problems:  E.  Driault,  Les  Problemes  Politiques  et  So- 
ciaux  h  la  Fin  du  XIX'  Steele  (1900);  T.  Ziegler,  Die  Geistigen 
und  Sozialen  Strbmungen  Deutschlands  im  Neunzehnten  Jahr- 
hundert  (ed.  1911). 

War:  I.  S.  Bloch,  trans,  from  the  Russian  by  R.  C.  Long,  The 
Future  of  War  (ed.  1902);  D.  S.  Jordan,  War  and  Waste  (1913); 
D.  S.  and  H.  E.  Jordan,  War's  Aftermath  (1914). 

Efforts  to  alleviate  war:  Clara  Barton,  The  Red  Cross  (1898) 

Arbitration:  A.  P.  Higgins,  The  Hague  Peace  Conferences 
(1909);  L.  Renault,  VCSuvre  de  La  Eaye  (1908);  J.  B.  Scott, 
Texts  of  the  Peace  Conferences  at  The  Hague  (1908),  The  Hague 
Peace  Conferences  of  1899  and  1907,  2  vols.  (1909);  G.  G.  Wilson 
editor.  The  Hague  Arbitration  Cases  (1915). 


APPENDIX 


APPENDIX 

EUROPEAN   RULERS   SINCE  THE 
FRENCH   REVOLUTION 

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY 

In  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  until    1804;  Austrian  Empire 
180^-67;  the  Dual  Monarchy^  Austria-Hungary y  1867-1918. 

Leopold  II,  1790-92  Francis  Joseph,  1848-1916 

Francis  I,  1792-1835  Charles  I,  1916-18 

Ferdinand  I,  1835-48 


BELGIUM 

Leopold  1, 1831-65  Albert  I,  1909- 

Lbopold  II,  1865-1909 


BULGARIA^ 

Principality  until  1909,  kingdom  afterward, 

Alexander,  1879-86  Boris  1, 1918- 

Ferdinand  I,  1887-1918 

DENMARK 

Christian  VII,  1766-1808  Christlajj  IX,  1868-1906 

Frederick  VI,  1808-39  Frederick  VIII,  1906-1« 

Christian  VIII,  1839-48  Christian  X,  1912- 
Frederick  VII,  1848-63 

65S 


854  APPENDIX 

FRANCE 

Louis  XVI,  1774-92 

The  First  Republic,  1792-1804 

The  Convention,  1792-6 

The  Directory,  1795-9 

The  Consulate  (Napoleon  Bonaparte,  First  Consul)  1799- 
1804 
The  First  Empire,  1804-1814 
Napoleon  I 
Louis  XVIII,  1814-24 
Charles  X,  1824-30 
Louis  Philippe,  1830-48 
The  Second  Republic,  1848-52 

Louis  Napoleon,  president 
The  Second  Empire,  1852-1870 

Napoleon  III 
The  Third  Republic,  1870- 

Govemment  of  National  Defence,  1870-1 
Presidents 

Adolphe  Thiers,  1871-3 
Marshal  MacMahon,  1873-0 
Jules  Grevy,  1879-87 
Sadi  Carnot,  1887-94 
Casimir-Perier,  1894-5 
Felix  Faure,  1895-9 
Emile  Loubet,  1899-1906 
Armand  Fallieres,  1906-13 
Raymond  Poincare,  191S-20 
Paul  Deschanel,  1920- 

THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

WiLLLUH  I,  1871-88 
Frederick  III,  1888 
William  II,  1888-1918 


APPENDIX  W5 

Chancellors 

Prince  Bismarck,  1871-90 
Count  von  Caprivi,  1890-4 
Prince  Hohenlohe-SchillingsfUrst,  1894-1900 
Count  von  Bulow,  1900-8 
Theobald  von  Bethmann-HoUweg,  1908-17 
Greorg  Michaelis,  1917 
Count  von  Hertling,  1917-18 
Prince  Max  of  Baden,  1918 
The  German  Rejmblic,  1918 — 

GREAT  BRITAIN 

After  1800  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland, 

Geobge  III,  1760-1820  Victoria,  1837-1901 

George  IV,  1820-30  Edward  VII,  1901-10 

William  IV,  1830-7  George  V,  1910- 

Prime    Ministers 

William  Pitt,  1783-1801 

Henry  Addington  (Viscount  Sidmouth)  1801-4 

William  Pitt  (II),  1804-6 

William  Lord  Grenville,  1806-7 

Duke  of  Portland,  1807-9 

Spencer  Perceval,  1809-12 

The  Eari  of  Liverpool,  1812-27 

George  Canning,  1827 

Viscoimt  Goderich,  1827 

The  Duke  of  Wellington,  1827-30 

Eari  Grey,  1830-4 

Viscount  Melbourne,  1834 

Sir  Robert  Peel,  1834-5 

Viscount  Melbourne  (II),  1835-41 

Sir  Robert  Peel  (II),  1841-6 

Lord  John  Russell,  1846-52 

The  Eari  of  Derby,  1852 

The  Eari  of  Aberdeen,  1852-5 

Viscount  Palmerston,  1855^ 


666  APPENDIX 

Prime  Ministers — continued 

The  Earl  of  Derby  (II),  1858-9 

Viscount  Palmerston  (II),  185»-65 

Earl  Russell  (II),  1865-6 

The  Earl  of  Derby  (III),  1866-S 

William  Ewart  Gladstone,  1868-74 

Benjamin  Disraeli  (Earl  of  Beaconsfield,  1876),  1874-80 

W.  E.  Gladstone  (II),  1880-5 

Robert  Cecil  (Marquis  of  Salisbury),  1885-6 

W.  E.  Gladstone  (III),  1886 

Marquis  of  Salisbury  (II),  1886-92 

W.  E.  Gladstone  (IV),  1892-4 

Archibald  P.  Primrose  (Earl  of  Rosebery),  1894^ 

Marquis  of  Salisbury  (III),  1895-1902 

Arthur  James  Balfour,  1902-5 

Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman,  1905-8 

Herbert  Henry  Asquith,  190&-16 

David  Lloyd  George,  1916- 

GREECE 

Otto  I,  1833-62  Constantine  I,  1913-17 

GaoBQE  I,  1863-1913  Alexander  I,  1917- 

ITALY 

Kingdom  of  Sardinia  until  1861 

Victor  Amadeus  III,  1773-96  Charles  Albert,  1831-49 

Charles  Emmanuel  IV,  Victor  Emmanuel  II, 

1796-1802  1849-78 

Victor  Emmanuel  1, 1802-21  Humbert,  1878-1900 

Charles  Feux,  1821-31  Victor  Emmanuel  III,  1900- 

MONTENEGRO 

Principality  until  1910;  kingdom  until  1918;  then  incorporated 
into  Jugoslavia 

Peter  I,  1782-1830  Danilo  I,  1851-60 

Peter  II,  1830-51  Nicholas  I,  1860-1918 


APPENDIX 


657 


THE  NETHERLANDS 

The  United  Provinces 

William  V,  Hereditary  Stadholdery  1751-95 
The  Batavian  Republic,  1795-1806 
Kingdom  of  Holland 

Louis  Bonaparte,  1806-10 
Part  of  the  First  French  Empire,  1810-13 
Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands 

William  I,  1813-40 

William  II,  1840-9 

William  III,  1849-90 

Wilhelmina,  1890- 


NORWAY 

Ruled  by  the  kings  of  Denmark  until  181^;  ruled  by  the  kings 
of  Sweden,  1811^-1905. 
Haakon  VII,  1905- 


THE  POPES 


Pius  VI,  1775-99 
Pius  VII,  1800-23 
Leo  XII,  1823-9 
Pius  VIII,  1829-30 
Gregory  XVI,  1831-46 


Pius  IX,  1846-78 
Leo  XIII,  1878-1908 
Pius  X,  1903-14 
Benedict  XV,  1914- 


PORTUGAL 


Maria  I,  1786-1816 

John  VI,  1816-26 

Pedro  IV,  1826 

Maria  II,  1826-8 

Miguel,  1828-34 

Marl\  II  {restored),  1834-53 


Pedro  V,  1853-61 
Luiz  I,  1861-89 
Carlos,  1889-1908 
Manoel  II,  1908-10 
Republic,  1910- 


658  APPENDIX 


PRUSSIA 

Frederick  William  II,  1786-97  William  I,  1861-88 

Frederick  William  III,  Frederick  III,  1888 

1797-1840 

Frederick  William  IV,  1840-61  William  II,  1888-1918 

RUMANIA 

Principality  until  1881 ,  kingdom  afterward. 
Charles  I,  1866-1914  Ferdinand  I,  1914- 

RUSSIA 

Catherine  II,  1762-96  Alexander  II,  1855-81 

Paul,  1796-1801  Alexander  III,  1881-94 

Alexander  I,  1801-25  Nicholas  II,  1894-1917 

Nicholas  I,  1825-55  Provisional  government^  1917 

Republic  of  Soviets,  1918 
Bolsheviki 

SERVIA 

Principality  until  1882;  kingdom  afterward;  in  1918  the  ruler 
became  king  of  the  **  Unitary  Kingdom  of  Serbs,  Croats,  and  Slo- 
venes** (Jugo-Slavia) , 

Karageorge,  1804-13 

MiLOSH,  1817-39 

Milan,  1839  Milan,  1868-89 

Michael,  1839-42  Alexander,  1889-1903 

Alexander  I,  1842-59  Peter  1, 1903- 

MlCHABL,  1860-8 

SPAIN 

Charles  IV,  1788-1808  Amadeo  of  Savot,  1870-3 

Joseph  Bonaparte,  1808-13  Spanish  Republic,  1873-5 

Ferdinand  VII,  1813-33  Alphonso  XII,  1875-85 

Isabella  II,  1833-68  Alphonso  XIII,  1886- 
Period  of  RevokUion,  1868-70 


APPENDIX 


659 


SWEDEN 


GusTAvus  IV,  1792-1809 
Charles  XIII,  1809-18 
Charles  XIV,  1818-44 
Oscar  I,  1844-59 


Charles  XV,  1859-72 
Oscar  II,  1872-1907 
GusTAVus  V,  1907- 


Selim  III,  1789-1807 
Mustapha  IV,  1807-8 
Mahmud  II,  1808-39 
Abdul  Medjid,  1839-61 
Abdul-Aziz,  1861-76 


TURKEY 


MuRAD  V,  1876 
Abdul-Hamid,  1876-1909 
Mohammed  V,  1909-18 
Mohammed  VI,  1918- 


INDEX 


INDEX 


Abdul-Hamid,  364. 

Aboiikir,  Battle  of,  72. 

Abyssinia,  488. 

Accident  Insurance  Laws,  343,  344. 

Act  of  Union  (Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land), 158,  181. 

Adowa,  Battle  of,  488. 

Adrianople,  captured  by  the  Turks, 
446,  by  the  Russians,  452,  by  the 
Bulgarians,  459,  recaptured  by  the 
Turks,  460;  obtained  by  the  Greeks, 
465. 

Adrianople,  Treaty  of,  451. 

Adriatic  Sea,  356,  444,  516. 

Affair  of  1875,  394,  395. 

Afghanistan,  480. 

Africa,  12,  596. 

Agadir,  504. 

Agriculture,  126. 

Aida,  627. 

Airplanes,  613,  614. 

Aisne,  Battle  of  the,  545;  Second 
Battle  of  the,  569. 

Aix-la-Chapelle,  Congress  of,  102. 

Albania,  conditions  in,  456;  consti- 
tuted by  the  Great  Powers,  459, 509. 

Albert,  Prince  Consort  of  Victoria, 
171. 

Alcaldes,  28. 

Alexander  I,  Tsar  of  Russia,  sues  for 
peace  from  Napoleon,  81;  promises 
the  liberation  of  Europe,  87;  desires 
to  make  a  better  world  and  abolish 
war,  98;  assists  Metternich,  103, 
223;  attitude  of  toward  the  Ger- 
manics, 217,  218;  relations  of  with 
Napoleon,  270;  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  272;  character  of  272; 
attitude  of  toward  reform  in  Prus- 
sia, 274;  end  of  the  reign  of,  274, 
275;  desires  to  get  Constantinople, 
280. 

Alexander  II,  Tsar  of  Russia,  acces- 
sion of,  282;  reforms  of,  282-5, 
becomes  conservative,  286;  death  of. 


289;  reforms  of  partly  imdone, 
420. 

Alexander  III,  Tsar  of  Russia,  acces- 
sion of,  419;  reign  of,  419-27. 

Algeciras,  Conference  of,  498. 

Algeria,  357,  483. 

Algiers,  483. 

Ali  of  Janina,  450. 

Allies,  advantages  of  in  the  Great  War, 
539. 

Almanack  de  Gotha,  436. 

Alsace,  323,  324,  326. 

Alsace-Lorraine,  ceded  to  the  German 
Empire,  245;  a  Reichsland,  330; 
government  of,  348;  position  of 
348,  349;  desire  of  the  French  for 
recovery  of,  518;  question  of,  581, 
582;  restored  to  France,  587. 

Amadeo  of  Savoy,  297. 

America,  European  frontier  in,  22; 
discovery  of,  23;  European  settle- 
ments in,  23-6;  seeming  remoteness 
of  from  Europe,  26,  27,  34;  abori- 
gines of,  27;  European  civilization 
in,  27-32;  European  administra- 
tion of,  32,  33;  restrictions  on  trade 
of,  33;  English  colonists  in,  34; 
rebellion  of,  35,  36;  Spanish  colon- 
ists in,  36;  rebellion  of,  36;  retains 
Eiiropean  culture,  37;  ties  of  with 
Europe,  37,  38;  position  of  in  the 
nineteenth  centm-y,  37. 

American  Army,  great  expedition  of  to 
France,  569,  570;  capture  of  the 
St.  Mihiel  salient  by,  571;  pene- 
trate the  Argonne,  572. 

American  CivU  War,  176. 

Amiens,  569. 

Amiens,  Treaty  of,  73. 

Ampere,  619. 

Anaesthesia,  622,  623. 

Anarchism,  139,  140;  opposed  by 
socialists,  140;  in  Russia,  288. 

Anatolia,  366. 

Andrussovo,  Treaty  of,  268. 


664 


INDEX 


Anglo-Russian  Agreement,  371,  499. 

Angola,  489. 

Annam,  484. 

rAnnSe  Terrible,  377. 

Antisepsis,  623. 

Antwerp,  port  of  closed,  302;  capture 
of  by  the  Germans,  542. 

Apollo  Belvedere,  628. 

Arabi  Pasha,  477. 

Arc  de  Triomphe,  629. 

Architecture,  since  the  French  Re- 
volution, 628. 

Argand,  611. 

D'Argenson,  44. 

Argonne,  572. 

Aristocracy,  in  Great  Britain,  409. 

Arkwright,  Richard,  115. 

Armenti^res,  569. 

Armies,  organization  of  in  different 
periods,  314-17;  at  the  beginning 
of  the  twentieth  centm-y,  514. 

Amdt,  224. 

Arnold,  Matthew,  625. 

Arras,  569. 

Arrondissements,  53. 

Art  of  War,  development  of,  70,  71. 

"Article  X,"  586. 

Asia,  430,  596. 

Asiatic  Turkey,  365-7,  375. 

Aspem,  Battle  of,  85. 

Asquith,  Herbert  Henry,  406. 

Assignats,  51. 

Asaociation  Cultuelle,  391. 

Association  of  the  Congo,  473. 

Astronomy,  617,  618. 

Ateliers  Nationaux,  202. 

Atlantis,  474. 

Atomic  Theory,  619. 

Audiencias,  29. 

Auerstadt,  Battle  of,  81. 

Ausgleich,  246,  247;  renewals  of,  440. 

Austerlitz,  Battle  of,  80. 

Australia,  476,  482. 

Austria,  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
17;  defeated  by  Napoleon,  68,  69, 
80,  85;  Revolution  of  1848  in, 
225;  difficulties  concerning  at  the 
Parliament  of  Frankfort,  227,  228; 
recovers  power,  230,  233;  revives 
the  Germanic  Confederation,  236; 
reasons  for  the  earlier  ascendancy 
of,  237;  power  of  declines,  237, 
238,  240;  overthrown  by  Prussia, 
243;  outside  of  Germany,  245; 
makes  concessions  to  Himgary, 
245,  246;  enters  the  Ausgleich, 
246;  power  of  in  Italy,  254,  256; 
defeated    by    France,    258;    loses 


Lombardy,  259;  loses  Venetia,  261; 
contest  of  with  Prussia,  318;  de- 
feated, 319;  relations  of  with  Hun- 
gary, 440,  441;  parts  of,  442;  peo- 
ples in,  442,  443;  defender  of 
Europe  against  the  Turks,  448; 
almost  exhausted,  568;  becomes 
separate  independent  state,  587; 
accepts  Treaty  of  St.  Germain, 
589;  position  of  in  1919-20,  594,  598. 
Austria-Hungary,  rivalry  of  with 
Russia,  353,  444-6;  ambitions  of 
in  the  Balkans,  354;  obtains  Bos- 
nia and  Herzegovina,  355,  455; 
alliance  of  with  the  German  Empire, 

355,  356;  enters  the  Triple  Alliance, 

356,  357;  closer  relations  of  with 
the  German  Empire,  367,  368; 
greater  interest  of  in  the  Balkans, 
368;  subject  peoples  in,  421;  422; 
since  1867,  439-46;  under  Franz 
Josef,  441;  parts  of,  442;  general 
character  of,  443,  444;  foreign 
policy  of,  444-6;  opposes  Russia 
in  the  Balkans,  449;  bars  Servia 
from  the  Adriatic,  459;  relations 
of  with  Servia,  463;  in  the  Balkan 
Crisis  of  1912-13,  509,  510;  desires 
to  recover  position  in  the  Balkans, 
511;  geographical  position  of,  516; 
policy  of  in  the  Balkans,  522; 
ultimatum  of  to  Servia,  526;  de- 
clares war  on  Servia,  528;  surren- 
ders to  the  Allies,  572;  end  of, 
589. 

Austrian    Empire,    after    1815,    219; 

peoples  of,  220;  old  regime  persists 

in,  220. 
Austrian  Netherlands,  15. 
Austrian  Note  to  Servia,  526,  527. 
Austrians,  defeated  by  the  Russians 

in    1914,   549;   attack   Italy,   558; 

defeated  by  the  Russians  in  1916, 

558;  defeated  by  the  Italians,  572. 
Austro-Prussian  War,  243,  246,  318, 

319. 
Automobiles,  613. 
Avocadro,  620. 

Babeuf,  131. 

Babylonian  Captivity,  641. 

Bach,  626. 

Bacteriology,  622. 

Baden,  244. 

Bagdad,  366. 

Bagdad  Railway,  366,  367,  375,  445, 

522. 
Bakunin.  140,  288. 


INDEX 


665 


Balkan  Crisis  of  1912-13,  509,  510. 

Balkan  League,  456,  457. 

Balkan  War,  First,  457-9. 

Balkan  War,  Second,  459-60. 

Balkans,  policy  of  Austria-Hungary 
in,  444;  situation  in  1913,  510. 

Ball,  John,  131. 

Baltic  Sea,  516. 

"Baltic  Barons,"  424. 

Baltic  Fleet,  432. 

Baltic  Provinces,  424,  425. 

Baluchistan,  480. 

Balzac,  625. 

Bank  of  France,  75. 

Bapaume,  557. 

Bastille,  the,  49. 

Batavian  Republic,  299. 

Bathtubs,  610. 

Bautzen,  Battle  of,  88. 

Bavaria,  238,  244. 

Bazaine,  324. 

Beaconsfield,  Earl  of,  on  England's 
desire  for  peace,  400. 

Bebel,  August,  136,  342. 

Beethoven,  626. 

Belfort,  325,  543. 

Belgium,  taken  by  France,  69;  joined 
to  Holland,  95;  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion in,  122,  123;  desh-ed  by  Na- 
poleon III,  209;  conditions  in  be- 
fore 1830,  300;  earlier  history  of, 
302;  obtains  independence,  302, 
303;  neutralized,  303;  obtains  Congo 
country,  490;  violation  of  the  neu- 
trality of  by  Germany,  530,  531, 
565;  invasion  of,  542;  in  1919-20, 
593. 

Benefit  of  Clergy.  161,  162. 

Bentham,  Jeremy,  160. 

Bdranger,  625. 

Berlin,  226,  336. 

Berlin,  Treaty  of,  355,  455. 

Berlin  Decree,  83. 

Bemhardi,  525. 

Berzelius,  620. 

Bessarabia,  obtained  by  Russia,  270, 
272,  466,  467. 

Bethman-HoUweg,  von,  531. 

Bhutan,  480. 

Bichat,  622. 

Birth  rate,  in  France,  392-4;  effects 
of  upon  civilization,  393,  394;  dif- 
ferences in,  517,  518. 

Bismarck,  Otto  von,  208,  209;  char- 
acter and  training  of,  241,  242; 
contest  of  with  the  Prussian  Land- 
tag, 242,  243;  diplomacy  of,  243-5, 
317,  318,  320,  321;  estimate  of.  261; 


reveals  Napoleon's  proposals  about 
Belgium,  303;  on  the  Parliament  of 
Frankfort,  228;  contest  of  with  the 
German  Catholics,  340-2;  with  the 
socialists,  342,  343;  state  socialism 
of,  343;  attitude  of  toward  the  Poles 
of  the  empire,  349;  on  the  position 
of  the  German  Empire,  352;  great 
work  of,  352  ff.;  at  the  Congress 
of  Berlin,  355,  357;  diplomatic 
plans  of,  358;  continues  the  new 
understanding  with  Russia,  358, 
359;  success  of  the  diplomacy  of, 
359,  360;  intentions  of  in  the  affair 
of  1875,  394;  threat  of  concerning 
France,  395;  passing  of,  360,  361; 
estimate  of  the  work  of,  361,  362; 
on  the  Alliance  between  the  Ger- 
man Empire  and  Austria-Hungary, 
S67;  axioms  of  the  foreign  policy  of, 
868;  ideas  of  about  colonies,  485. 

Bjbrko,  meeting  at,  498. 

"Black  Hundreds,"  435. 

Blackstone,  on  the  government  of 
England,  146. 

Blanc,  Louis,  on  the  Terror,  61;  in 
the  Revolution  of  1848,  133,  200, 
201. 

Blanqui,  Adolphe,  on  the  Industrial 
Revolution,  109. 

Bleeding,  622. 

Blenheim,  Battle  of,  545. 

Blockade,  of  Great  Britain,  attempted 
by  Napoleon,  83;  of  the  German 
Empire,  by  Great  Britain,  555. 

"Blood  and  Iron,"  Bismarck  on,  212. 

Board  of  Trade  and  Plantations, 
British,  35. 

Board  Schools,  405. 

Boers,  348,  478. 

Boer  War,  370,  479. 

Bohemia,  230-4,  442. 

Bolsheviki,  ideas  of  about  the  bour- 
geoisie, 8;  purposes  of,  61;  supported 
by  Russian  peasants,  63;  power 
seized  by,  138;  in  the  Great  War, 
563;  origin  of,  602;  doctrines  of, 
602,  603;  get  control  of  Russia, 
604;  accept  the  Peace  of  Brest- 
Litovsk,  604;  rule  of  in  Russia, 
605;  counter-revolutionary  move- 
ments crushed  by,  605,  606. 

Bonaparte,  Joseph,  84. 

Bonaparte,  Louis,  299. 

Bonaparte,  Louis  Napoleon,  becomes 
president  of  France,  203;  career  of, 
203,  204;  becomes  emperor,  204. 
See  Napdeon  III. 


666 


INDEX 


Bonaparte,  Napoleon,  see  Napoleon. 

Bonapartists,  ^1. 

Bonheur,  Rosa,  630. 

Bordeaux,  60,  543. 

Borneo,  489. 

Borodino,  87. 

Bosnia,  obtained  by  Austria-Hungary, 
355,  455;  crisis  concerning,  499- 
502;  annexed  by  Austria- Hungary, 
500. 

Boulanger,  General,  387,  388,  395. 

Bourbons,  in  Italy,  16,  250;  restored 
to  France,  89. 

Bourgeoisie,  8;  in  France  in  the  eigh- 
teenth century,  42,  43;  overthrown 
by  radicals  in  Paris,  55;  regain 
power  in  France,  63;  Karl  Marx 
on,  134;  French,  in  the  reign  of 
Louis  Philippe,  196,  197;  in  the 
Germanics,  225,  226. 

Boxer  Outbreak,  431. 

Boyen,  315. 

Boyle,  618. 

Brahms,  626. 

Brandes,  Georg,  625. 

Brazil,  24,  292. 

Breaking  on  the  Wheel,  647. 

Brest-Litovsk,  captured  by  the  Ger- 
mans, 551. 

Brest-Litovsk,  Treaty  of,  563,  687, 
604. 

Briey  Basin,  336. 

Bright,  John,  175. 

British,  ambitions  of  in  Africa,  486; 
failiu-e  of  at  Gallipoli,  552,  553; 
defeated  in  Picardy,  568,  569; 
driven  back  toward  the  Channel, 
569;  break  the  Hindenburg  Line, 
572. 

British  Colonial  Administration,  35. 

British  East  Africa,  478. 

British  Empire,  organization  and 
character  of,  177,  178;  loyalty  of 
the  peoples  of,  180;  treatment  of 
the  peoples  in,  347,  348;  water 
routes  of,  366;  growth  of,  475-81; 
character  and  extent  of,  481;  peo- 
ples of,  481,  482;  government  of, 
482,  483;  in  1919-20,  597. 

British  Fleet,  new  concentration  of, 
371;  in  the  Great  War,  554,  555. 

British  I^bor  Committee,  Report  of, 
408. 

British  South  Africa  Company,  473, 
474,  478. 

Browning,  Robert,  625. 

Brumaire,  Eighteenth  and  Nineteenth, 
64,  73. 


Brunswick,  Duke  of,  55. 

Brusilov,  General,  558. 

Bryce,  James,  Viscount,  on  an  en- 
during peace,  576. 

Bucharest,  Treaty  of  (1812),  270; 
(1913),  460,  463. 

Buffon,  637. 

Building,  increase  of,  609. 

Bukowina,  442. 

Bulgaria,  obtains  autonomy,  452, 
453;  obtains  independence,  455; 
declares  war  on  Turkey,  457; 
victories  of  in  the  First  Balkan 
War,  458;  defeated  in  the  Second 
Balkan  War,  460;  history  of,  468- 
70;  domestic  affairs  of,  470;  posi- 
tion of  in  191.S,  510;  assists  in  con- 
quering Servia,  552;  surrenders 
to  the  Allies,  571;  after  the  Great 
War,  590. 

Bulgarian  Atrocities,  452. 

Bulgarian  Exarchate,  470. 

Bulgarians,  470. 

Biilow,  Prince  von,  on  German 
economic  development,  329. 

Bundesrath,  331. 

Bunsen,  619. 

Bm-ke,  Edmund,  on  the  French 
Revolution,  40. 

Burma,  480. 

Burns,  Robert,  624. 

Burschenschaft,  223. 

Butt,  Isaac,  413. 

Byron,  Lord,  on  Rome,  249;  assists 
the  Greeks,  450;  writings  of,  624, 
625. 

Cabildos,  28. 

Cabinet    Government,    development 

of  in  England,  149,  150. 
Cabot,  John,  25. 
"Cadets,"  435. 
Calais,  33. 
Cambodia,  483. 
Cambrai,  557. 
Cambridge,  404. 
Campbell-Bannerman,     Sir     Henry, 

406. 
Campo-Formio,  Treaty  of,  69,  216. 
Canova,  628. 
Cape  Colony.  476,  478. 
"Capping  the  Line,"  432. 
Carlowitz,  Treaty  of,  448. 
Confederation  of  the  Rhine,  216. 
Canada,  178,  179. 

Canada  Government  Act  of  1840,  179. 
Canossa,  341. 
Cape  of  Good  Hope,  292. 


INDEX 


667 


Capitalists,  128. 

Caporetto.  563. 

Carbonari,  254i. 

Carinthia,  442. 

Carlists,  296. 

Carlsbad  Decrees,  223,  224. 

Carniola,  442. 

Carnot,  59,  60. 

Carolina,  26. 

Carpathian  Moimtains,  struggle  for 
the  passes  of,  550. 

Carrier,  60. 

Cart  Wright,  Edmund,  115. 

Castelar,  Emilio,  296,  297. 

Castelfidardo,  Battle  of,  260. 

Catherine  II,  of  Russia,  269,  274. 

Catholic  Association,  in  Ireland,  163. 

Catholic  Party,  in  the  German  Em- 
pire, 341. 

Catholics,  in  the  United  Kingdom, 
discriminations  against  removed, 
162,  163;  in  Germany,  340;  in  the 
German  Empire,  340-2. 

Caucasia,  425. 

Cavour,  Camillo  di,  257-262. 

Celebes,  489. 

Celtic  Language,  in  Ireland,  414. 

Celtic  Peoples,  180. 

Center  Party,  in  the  German  Empire, 
341,  342. 

Ceylon,  301,  476. 

Champagne,  battle  in,  556. 

Channel  Ports,  struggle  for,  548. 

Charlemagne,  82,  214. 

Charleroi,  Battle  of,  542. 

Charles  X,  King  of  France,  193. 

Charles  Albert,  of  Piedmont,  256. 

Charter,  The  French,  191. 

Chartism,  173-6. 

Chartist  Petition,  concerning  the 
government  of  Great  Britain,  168. 

Chateau-Thierry,  570. 

Chaumont,  Treaty  of,  88. 

Chemin  des  Dames,  561,  569. 

Chemistry,  619,  620. 

China,  at  the  end  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  430;  British  acquisitions 
in,  479,  481;  French  acquisitions 
in,  483;  German  acquisitions  in, 
486. 

Chinese-Japanese  War,  430. 

Chopin,  627. 

Church,  in  France  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  41;  property  of  in  France 
confiscated,  50;  in  Europe  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  639-46. 

Church  of  England,  work  of  in  educa- 
tion, 404. 


Church  of  Ireland,  disestablished,  412. 
Church  and  State,  in  France,  51;  in 

the   Middle  Ages,   S88;  after  the 

Reformation,  389. 
Cinemas,  616. 
Cities,  before  the  French  Revolution, 

9,  10;  developed  by  the  Industrial 

Revolution,  122. 
Civil  Law,  75. 
Civil  War,  American,  185. 
Classicism,  624;  in  music,  sculpture, 

and  painting,  626,  628,  629. 
Clemenceau,  562;  at  the  Congress  of 

Paris,  580,  584. 
Clericalism,  in  France,  390. 
Clothing,  611,  612. 
Clubs,  Political,  in  France,  52. 
Coal,  importance  of  in  the  Industrial 

Revolution,    116;   in  the  German 

Empire,  336. 
Coalition,  First,  57,  68,  69. 
Coalition,  Second,  72,  73. 
Coalition,  Third,  80,  81. 
Coalition,  Sixth,  87. 
Cobden,  Richard,  175. 
Cochin  China,  483. 
Code  Napoleon,  75,  76;  in  the  Ger- 
manics, 217. 
Colonial  Expansion,  European,  473, 

474. 
Colonies,    British,    475-83;    French, 

483-5;  German,  485-7,  581;  Italian, 

487,  488;  Dutch,  489;  Belgian,  489, 

490. 
Colonization,  by  Germans  in  eastern 

and  southern  Europe,  365. 
Columbus,  Christopher,  23. 
Collot,  60. 

Commercial  Methods,  338. 
Committee  of  Public  Safety,  60. 
Commune,    organized    in    Paris,    49; 

radicals  get  control  of,  55. 
Commune  of  Paris   (1871),  136,  288; 

origin  of,  378,.  379;  suppression  of, 

380. 
Communes,  53. 
Commimism   (another  term  for  the 

now  better-known  socialism),  182. 
Communist  Manifesto,  134. 
Comte,  643. 

Concert  of  Europe,  98, 102  ff . 
Concordat    of    1801,    75,    389,    641; 

abrogated,  391. 
Confederation  of  the  Rhine,  85. 
Conference  ot  Berlin,  478. 
Conference  of  London  (1912),  458. 
Congo,  Belgian,    489,    490;    French, 

484. 


668 


INDEX 


Congo  Free  State,  490. 

Congress  of  Berlin,  354,  855. 

Congress  of  Paris  (1856),  206,  647. 

Congress  of  Paris  (1919),  576-85; 
problems  before,  580-4;  procedure 
at,  580,  684. 

Congress  of  Verona,  104,  296. 

Congress  of  Vienna,  discord  at,  89, 
96,  97;  procedure  at,  94;  territorial 
arrangements  at,  95;  disregards 
nationality,  96;  efforts  at  for  a  last- 
ing settlement,  97;  Final  Act  of, 
97;  decisions  of  respecting  the 
Germanics,  217,  218;  adds  to  the 
territory  of  Prussia,  237;  decisions 
of  respecting  Italy,  251;  concerning 
Holland,  300;  concerning  Switzer- 
land, 304;  concerning  Denmark, 
Norway,  and  Sweden,  307 

Conquistador es,  28. 

Conscripts,  in  Napoleon's  armies,  86. 

Constable,  630. 

Constantinople,  270,  584. 

Constituent  Assembly  of  1848  in 
France,  203. 

Constituent  Diet  in  Austria  (1848), 
234. 

Constitution  of  1791  (French),  52,  53. 

Constitution  of  the  Year  I,  306. 

Constitution  of  the  Year  III,  63. 

Constitution  of  the  Year  VIII,  74. 

Constitution  of  1848  (Switzerland), 
306. 

Constitution  of  1871  (German  Em- 
pire), 330. 

Constitution  of  1875  (France),  382. 

Constitutional  Democrats,  in  Russia, 
435. 

Continental  System,  86,  270. 

Convention,  French,  constructive 
work  of,  62. 

Convention  of  Gastein,  318. 

Copernicus,  635. 

Corn  Laws,  126,  174;  repeal  of,  175. 

Corot,  630. 

Corporation  Act,  148. 

Corrupt  Practices  Act,  401. 

Corsica,  67. 

Cortes  (Portuguese),  293. 

Cortes  (Spanish),  28,  297. 

Corvie,  44. 

Cotton  Gin,  115. 

Coimcil  of  the  Indies,  Spanish,  35. 

Council  of  State,  in  Russia,  434. 

Coimtry,  life  in,  in  Europe,  4. 

Coup  d'Etat  (1851),  204. 

Courbet,  630. 

Courland,  424. 


Couza,  Alexander,  466,  467. 
Covenant  of  the  I^ieague  of  Nations, 

585,  586. 
Creation,  ideas  concerning,  636. 
Crete,  465. 
Crimean  War,  186,  206;  Piedmont  in, 

257;  causes  of,  281 ;  course  of,  281, 

282;  memories  of,  395. 
Criminal  Law,  in  Great  Britain,  161, 

162. 
Crises  in  recent  European   history, 

495. 
Crispi,  Francesco,  on  the  position  of 

Italy,  249. 
Criticism,  625. 
Croatia-Slavonia,  442. 
Crompton,  Samuel,  115. 
Curia  Romana,  262. 
Custozza,  Battle  of,  233,  256. 
Cyprus,  477. 
Cyrenaica,  488. 
Czecho-Slovakia,  587,  589. 
Czecho-Slovaks,  582,  583. 

Daguerre,  616. 

Daguerreotypes,  616. 

Dahomey,  484. 

Dalton,  John,  619. 

Damascus,  365. 

Danish  West  Indies,  309. 

Dannevirke,  317. 

Dante,  635. 

Danton,  53,  61. 

Danubian  principalities,  207,  281; 
obtain  autonomy,  451,  466. 

Danzig,  583. 

Dardanelles,  Allied  attack  on,  552. 

Darwin,  Charles,  638,  643,  645. 

Daubigny,  630. 

David,  629. 

Davitt,  Michael,  on  democracy,  632. 

Davy,  Sir  Humphrey,  618. 

De4k,  Francis,  232,  246. 

Debussy,  627. 

Decayed  Boroughs,  150. 

Decazes,  191. 

Decembrist  Rebellion,  275. 

Declaration  of  Independence,  46. 

Declaration  of  London  (1871),  503. 

Declaration  of  Pillnitz,  55. 

Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man, 
40,  52. 

Degas,  630. 

Delacroix,  629. 

Delcasse,  Th^phile,  496,  498. 

Democracy,  forwarded  by  the  In- 
dustrial Revolution,  142;  by  educa- 
tion, 143;  not  much  of  before  the 


INDEX 


669 


middle  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
151,  152;  growth  of,  344;  in  the 
German  Empire,  344,  345;  growth 
of  in  Great  Britain,  400. 

Democratic  Control  of  Foreign  Af- 
fairs, 578. 

Democratic  Ideas,  development  of, 
46,  47. 

Denikin,  General,  605. 

Denmark,  in  the  eighteenth  centm-y, 
16;  conquered  by  Austria  and 
Prussia,  243,  317,  318;  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  308,  309;  gov- 
ernment of,  309. 

Beutsches  Reich,  330. 

Dickens,  Charles,  184,  625. 

Diderot,  Denis,  45,  390, 

Directory,  63,  68;  difficulties  of,  72; 
overthrown,  73. 

Disarmament,  580. 

Disraeli,  Benjamin,  advocates  par- 
liamentary reform,  176.  See  Bea- 
consfield.  Earl  of. 

Dissenters,  in  Great  Britain,  148,  162. 

Divine  Right,  in  France,  191,  195; 
in  Prussia,  332. 

Dobrudja,  467. 

Domestic  System  of  Manufacturing, 
124,  125;  passes  away,  125,  126. 

Dominion  of  Canada,  179. 

Don  Carlos,  296. 

Don  Giovanni,  627. 

Donnersmarck,  Count  von,  498. 

Dostoievsky,  625. 

Drang  nach  Osten,  365. 

Dreadnaught,  372. 

Dreikaiserbund,  353. 

Dresden,  Battle  of,  88. 

Dreyfus,  388. 

Dreyfus  Case,  388. 

"Dropping  the  Pilot,"  361. 

Dual  Alliance  (France  and  Russia), 
367;  military  convention  in,  377; 
formation  of,  395,  396;  results  of, 
396,  397. 

Dual  Alliance  (German  Empire  and 
Austria-Hungary),  355,  356. 

Dual  Control  of  Egypt,  477. 

Dual  Monarchy,  established,  246; 
government  of,  246;  success  of, 
247.     See  Austria-Hungary. 

Dulcigno,  462. 

Duma,  Imperial,  First,  434,  435; 
Second,  436;  Third.  436;  in  the  Rus- 
sian Revolution,  601. 

Dumas,  285,  420. 

Dunajec,  Battle  of  the,  550. 

Durazzo,  458,  509. 


Durham,  Lord,  sent  to  Canada,  178; 

Report  of,  179. 
Dutch,  take  Portuguese  colonies,  24, 

25,  settle  in  America,  25. 
Dutch  Colonies,  489. 
Dutch  East  India  Company,  473- 
Dutch  Guiana,  489. 
Dutch  Netherlands,  16. 
Dvordk,  627. 

East  India  Company,  English,  13,  33, 
182,  183. 

Eastern  Roman  Empire,  266,  446. 

Edison,  Thomas,  616. 

Education,  in  France,  reformed  by 
Napoleon  I,  76;  development  of, 
142,  143;  relation  of  to  the  growth 
of  democracy,  344,  345;  in  France, 
reform  of,  385;  French,  reputation 
of  abroad,  385,  386;  partly  managed 
by  the  Church,  389;  taken  from  the 
control  of  Church,  390;  in  England, 
404;  development  of  in  Europe, 
614,  615,  632,  633. 

Education  Act  of  1870,  405. 

Edward  VII,  King  of  England,  371. 

Egypt,  expedition  of  Napoleon  to, 
72;  growth  of  British  power  in, 
477,  478. 

EiflFel  Tower,  629. 

Einkreisung,  374. 

Elba,  89. 

Electric  Lights,  611. 

Elizabeth,  of  England,  98. 

Elizabeth,  Empress  of  Austria,  441. 

Electoral  Reform  Law  of  1918,  404. 

Electricity,  619. 

EmigrSs,  51,  54,  56. 

Ems  Dispatch,  321. 

Encyclopidie,  45. 

Engels,  Friedrich,  134. 

England,  government  of  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  3;  disappearance 
of  serfdom  in,  6;  government  of, 
11,  12;  reasons  for  emigration  from 
in  the  seventeenth  centm-y,  25; 
religious  troubles  in,  25;  threatened 
with  invasion  by  Napoleon,  79; 
saved  by  the  victory  at  Trafalgar, 
80.  81. 

English  Colonists  in  America,  30,  31; 
well  treated,  34;  character  of,  34; 
estrangement  of,  35;  attitude  of 
toward  independence,  36. 

English  Colonization  in  America,  be- 
ginning of,  25. 

English  Culture  in  America,  31. 

Englishman's  Home,  An,  372. 


670 


INDEX 


Entente  between  Russia  and  France, 
395  396. 

Entente  CordiaU,  371,  496,  497;  be- 
comes stronger,  608. 

Eritrea,  488. 

Esthonia,  424. 

Etats  GinSraux,  see  States  General. 

Europe,  primacy  of  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  12;  culture  of  in  America, 
22  ff.;  population  of,  120;  colonial 
expansion  of,  473-5;  increased  im- 
portance of,  474;  divided  between 
the  Triple  Alliance  and  the  Triple 
Entente,  495  ff. 

European  Colonization  in  America, 
27  ff. 

European  Colonial  Administration 
in   America,  32  ff . 

European  Concert,  104,  105. 

Evolution,  Doctrine  of,  637-9. 

Fabian  Society,  137. 

Factory  Legislation,  in  Great  Britain, 
169,  406. 

Factory  Towns,  126. 

Falk  Laws  341. 

Falkland  Islands,  476;  Battle  of  the, 
554 

Fashoda,  397,  416. 

Fathers  and  Sons,  288. 

Faust,  627. 

Fellaheen,  483. 

Fenians,  182. 

Ferdinand  II  (King  of  the  Two  Sici- 
lies), 256. 

Ferdinand  VII,  King  of  Spain,  104, 
296. 

Feudal  Obligations  in  Rumania,  468. 

Feudalism,  10. 

Fieschi  Plot,  196. 

"Financial  Mobilization,"  508. 

Finland,  conquered  by  Russia,  82; 
taken  by  Russia,  270,  272. 

Finns,  424. 

Fu*st  Consul  (Napoleon),  74,  77. 

Fiske,  John,  on  the  vastness  of  mod- 
ern knowledge,  608. 

Flaubert,  625. 

Flottenverein,  370,  373. 

"Fly-shuttle,"  115. 

Foch,  Ferdinand,  at  the  Marne,  544; 
commander-in-chief  of  the  Allied 
forces,  569;  begins  a  great  Allied 
oflfensive,  570. 

Folkething,  309. 

Fontainebleau,  Decree  of,  83. 

Forstner,  lieutenant  von,  347. 

Forty-two-centimeter  Guns,  542. 


Fouch6,  60. 

Fourier,  133. 

"Fourteen  Points"  of  President  Wil- 
son, 578. 

France,  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
14;  the  leader  of  civilization,  15; 
conditions  in  during  the  eighteenth 
century,  41  ff.;  during  the  French 
Revolution,  48-63;  under  the  Direc- 
tory, 72,  73;  under  Napoleon,  73 
ff.;  position  of  in  1802,  76,  77;  in 
1814,  94;  after  1815,  188;  affected 
by  the  settlement  of  Vienna,  189; 
political  progress  and  reaction  in, 
189,  190,  191,  192;  intervenes  in 
Spain,  193;  Revolution  of  1830  in, 
194;  under  Louis  Philippe,  195  ff.; 
political  parties  in,  196;  Industrial 
Revolution  in,  197;  foreign  policy 
of  imder  Louis  Philippe,  198;  dis- 
content in,  198,  199;  Revolution  of 
1848  in,  199-203;  Second  Re- 
public in,  200-4;  Second  Empire  in, 
204-10;  obtains  Nice  and  Savoy, 
259;  attitude  of  toward  Prussia, 
319,  320;  led  into  war,  321;  army 
of  completely  defeated,  322-8; 
Third  Republic  established  in,  325, 
381;  recovery  of,  378,  380  ff.;  Corn- 
mune  in,  378-380;  reforms  in,  380, 
381;  government  of,  382-5;  reform 
of  education  in,  385;  prosperity 
in,  386;  relations  of  with  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  386,  387,  394,  395, 
397;  domestic  difficulties  in,  387, 
388;  Church  and  State  in,  388-92; 
birth  rate  in,  392-4;  makes  the  Dual 
Alliance  with  Russia,  395,  396; 
relations  of  with  Great  Britain, 
397,  398,  416;  gets  concessions  in 
southern  China,  430;  colonial  em- 
pire of,  483-5;  makes  Entente 
Cordiale  with  Great  Britain,  495- 
7;  in  the  First  Morocco  Crisis, 
497-9;  in  the  Second  Morocco 
Crisis,  504-9;  invasion  of  in  1914, 
541;  at  the  brink  of  destruction, 
543;  nearly  exhausted,  568;  in 
1919-20,  593;  national  debt  of, 
598. 

Franchise,  in  France,  under  the  con- 
stitution of  1791,  53;  in  Great 
Britain,    before     1832,    150,     164; 

'  after  1832,  166;  after  1867,  177; 
in  the  North  German  Confedera- 
tion, 177;  in  France,  in  1814,  191; 
in  1831,  195;  in  1848,  201;  in  Italy, 
263;  in  Holland,  301;  in  Belgium, 


INDEX 


671 


303;  in  Switzerland,  305;  in  Nor- 
way, 307,  308;  in  Sweden,  308;  in 
Prussia,  331,  332;  in  Berlin,  332; 
in  Great  Britain  after  1884,  400;  in 
1918,  404;  in  Russia,  434,  436;  in 
Austria,  442;  in  Hungary,  443. 

Franco-Prussian  "War,  244,  303;  causes 
of,  319-22;  course  of,  322-8;  Ger- 
man procedure  in,  326;  results  of, 
326,  328. 

Francs-timirs,  326. 

Frankfort  Parliament,  scheme  of  for 
a  German  Empire,  228;  failure  of, 
228,  229;  resistance  to,  234. 

Frankfort,  Treaty  of,  326,  380. 

Franz,  Robert,  626. 

Franz  Ferdinand,  Archduke,  death  of, 
441,  526;  scheme  of,  445. 

Franz  Josef,  Emperor-King  of  Aus- 
tria-Hungary, 441,  442. 

Fraunhofer,  619. 

Frederick  the  Great,  and  the  French 
language,  15. 

Frederick  HI,  German  Emperor,  333. 

Frederick  William  III,  King  of 
Prussia,  223. 

Frederick  William,  IV,  King  of  Prussia, 
226,  228,  241. 

Free  Cities,  in  the  Holy  Roman  Em- 
pire, 213,  216. 

"Freedom  of  the  Seas,"  578,  579,  580. 

French,  attempt  colonization  in  Amer- 
ica, 24;  rally  of  in  the  IVanco- Prus- 
sian War,  325;  strength  of,  378; 
failure  of  at  Gallipoli,  552,  553; 
successfully  defend  Verdun,  557; 
fail  to  break  the  German  lines  in 
1917,  561;  exhausted,  562. 

French  Canadians,  348. 

French  Cochin  China,  484. 

French  Language,  in  Europe,  15. 

French  Prose,  15. 

French  Revolution,  40;  conditions 
which  led  to,  41-7;  first  stage  of, 
48-53;  radicalism  in,  53;  threatened 
by  the  old  system  in  Europe,  54-7; 
by  rebellions  in  France,  57,  59; 
saved  by  French  nationalism,  57-9; 
second  stage  of,  60-3;  the  bour- 
geoisie get  control  in,  63;  third 
stage  of,  63,  64;  results  of,  64,  65; 
helps  the  rise  of  Napoleon,  71,  72; 
Europe  hostile  to,  78;  preserved  by 
Napoleon,  90;  reaction,  against, 
100,  101;  eflfects  of,  110;  on  Eng- 
land, 154;  carried  forward  by  the 
Revolution  of  1830,  189,  190;  in 
the  Germanies,  217;  effects  of  upon 


Italy,    250,    251;    in    Spain,    295; 

in  Switzerland,  304;  national  armies 

in,  315;  eflFect  of  upon  the  Roman 

Catholic  Church,  641. 
Freron,  60. 
Fresnel,  619. 
Freytag,  625. 
Friedland,  Battle  of,  81. 
Fulton,  Robert,  117,  613. 

Galicia,  442;  overrun  by  the  Russians, 
549;  abandoned  by  them,  551. 

Gallipoli,  Allied  failm-e  at,  552,  553. 

Galvani,  619. 

Gama,  Vasco  da,  292. 

Garibaldi,  Giuseppe,  career  of,  259, 
260;  triumphs  of,  260. 

Gas,  Illuminating,  611. 

Geographical  Factors,  as  causes  of  the 
Great  War,  515-17. 

George  III,  King  of  Great  Britain, 
of  the  United  Kingdom,  relations 
of  with  cabinet  government,  149; 
character  of,  158;  failures  of  con- 
cerning America  and  Ireland,  158, 
159. 

George  rV,  of  the  United  Kingdom, 
159. 

George,  David  Lloyd,  on  the  small 
nations,  291;  position  of,  406,  408; 
proposed  reforms  of,  409,  410; 
prime  minister,  415;  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Paris,  580,  585. 

Georgia,  475. 

Gericault,  629. 

German  Army,  limited,  588. 

German  Colonies,  485-7. 

German  Confederation,  218;  revived, 
236;  dissolved,  243,  319;  votes  for 
war  against  Prussia,  318.  * 

German  East  Africa,  486. 

German  Southwest  Africa,  486. 

German  Empire,  growth  of  the  popu- 
lation of,  121;  agriculture  in,  126, 
335,  336;  tremendous  growth  of, 
329,  330;  government  of,  330-2; 
rulers  of,  332-4;  economic  advance 
of,  335;  industrial  growth  in,  336; 
commercial  development  of,  337- 
9;  increase  of  national  wealth  and 
population  in,  339;  Kulturkampf  in, 
340-2;  socialists  in,  342,  343;  state 
socialism  in,  343,  344;  slow  progress 
of  democracy  in,  344-7;  militarism 
in,  347;  treatment  of  subject  races 
in,  347-50;  position  of  in  European 
affairs,  352;  relations  of  with 
Austria-Himgary  and  Russia,  353; 


672 


INDEX 


alliance  of  with  Austria-Hungary, 

355,  356;  enters  the  Triple  Alliance, 

356,  357;  hegemony  of  in  Europe, 
358;  new  era  begins  in,  362,  363; 
under  William  II,  363-75;  foreign 
relations  of  under,  363-75;  naval 
policy  of,  369,  370,  372;  agreement 
with  Great  Britain  considered,  374, 
375;  relations  of  with  France,  394, 
395,  397;  takes  Kiao-chau,  430; 
alleged  ambitions  of,  494;  fear  of, 
496;  causes  First  Morocco  Crisis, 
497-9;  intervenes  in  the  Bosnia- 
Herzegovina  Crisis,  499-502;  makes 
the  Potsdam  Accord,  502,  503; 
imposing  position  of  in  Europe, 
502;  in  the  second  Morocco  Crisis, 
504-9;  in  the  Balkan  Crisis,  509, 
510;  increases  its  army,  511;  rivaby 
of  with  Great  Britain,  519,  520; 
desire  of  for  a  greater  colonial 
empire,  521,  522;  position  of  in 
the  Balkans  in  1913,  522;  promises 
Austria-Hungary  support  in  1914, 
527;  threatens  Russia,  528;  declares 
war  on  France,  529;  on  France,  530; 
violates  the  neutrality  of  Belgium, 
530;  advantages  of,  in  the  Great 
War,  535-8;  plan  of,  540;  near  the 
end  of  its  strength,  568;  end  of,  593. 

German  Naval  Laws,  370,  496,  519. 

German  Peasants,  revolt  of  in  1525,  7. 

German  Republic,  593,  594,  598. 

German  System  of  Government,  ori- 
gin of,  334;  advantages  of,  334,  335. 

German  Writers,  on  the  destiny  of 
Holland,  301;  on  the  destiny  of 
Denmark,  309. 

Germanics,  The,  in  the  eighteenth 
centiu-y,  17,  18,  212,  213;  reform 
in,  217;  rise  of  national  spirit  in, 
217;  lack  of  political  progress  in, 
219,  221,  222;  discontent  in,  223; 
Revolution  of  1848  in,  225  ff.; 
democracy  and  nationalism  in, 
229,  230;  economic  imification  of, 
240;  unification  of,  how  brought 
about,  345,  346. 

Germans,  contest  of  with  the  Slavs, 
17,  266;  military  triumphs  of, 
313,  314;  procedm-e  of  in  the 
Franco-Prussian  War,  326;  com- 
mercial methods  of,  338;  rivaby 
of  with  the  Slavs,  364;  in  eastern 
and  southern  Europe,  365;  in  Rus- 
sia, 425;  character  of  before  the 
Great  War,  523;  believe  them- 
selves a  superior  race,   523,   524; 


glorify  war,  524;  great  ambition 
of,  524;  harsh  doctrines  taught  by, 
525;  defeated  at  the  Marne,  544; 
great  success  of,  545,  548;  defeated 
in  the  struggle  for  the  Channel 
Ports,  548;  defeat  the  Russians 
at  Tannenberg,  549;  fail  to  capture 
Verdun,  556,  557;  methods  of  in 
the  Great  War,  564,  565;  great 
offensive  of  in  1918,  568-70;  de- 
feated by  the  Americans,  572;  by 
the  British,  572,  573;  surrender, 
573;  accept  the  Treaty  of  Versailles, 
587;  losses  of,  587,  588;  dealings  of 
with  the  Bolsheviki,  603;  contribu- 
tion of  to  music,  625,  626;  methods 
of  in  war,  648. 

Germany  arid  the  Next  War,  525. 

Ghent,  Treaty  of,  184. 

Gibraltar,  366,  475. 

Gioberti,  255. 

Girondists,  54,  59,  61. 

Gladstone,  William  Ewart,  on  expell- 
ing the  Turks,  452;  on  German 
colonization,  473. 

Gneisenau,  315. 

Godwin,  Mary,  153. 

Goethe,  on  Valmy,  56;  on  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire,  212;  as  a  writer, 
624. 

Gogol,  625. 

Gorizia,  558. 

Gortchakov,  355. 

Gounod,  627. 

Government  of  National  Defence, 
French,  proclamation  of,  377. 

Grande  ArmSe,  87,  395,  396. 

Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw,  82,  85,  97, 
277. 

Grand  Fleet,  British,  work  of,  554, 
555. 

Gravelotte-St.  Privat,  324. 

Great  Britain,  in  the  eighteenth 
centiwy,  13,  14;  continues  the  war 
with  France,  82;  sustains  a  long 
struggle  with  Napoleon,  83;  block- 
ades the  Continent,  84;  takes 
colonies  during  the  struggle  with 
Napoleon,  95;  refuses  assent  to 
the  Holy  Alliance,  99;  withdraws 
from  the  European  Concert,  104; 
^Industrial  Revolution  begins  in, 
114;  progress  of,  114-18;  pre- 
eminence of,  116;  growth  of 
population  of,  120;  agriculture 
declines  in,  126;  constitution  of, 
147;  position  of  Roman  Catholics 
In,  147;  position  of  dissenters  in, 


INDEX 


673 


148;  position  of  king  in,  148; 
development  of  government  in, 
149,  150;  parliament  of,  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  150,  151;  con- 
dition of  the  people  of,  153;  of 
women,  153,  154;  eflFects  of  the 
French  Revolution  in,  154;  reac- 
tion in,  154,  155;  conditions  in 
after  1815,  155,  156;  repression  in, 
156,  157;  attitude  of  in  foreign 
affairs,  157,  158;  passing  of  the  old 
era  in,  159,  160;  desire  for  par- 
liamentary reform  in,  160;  reforms 
in,  161-71;  under  Victoria,  171  ff.; 
Chartism  in,  173-6;  parliamentary 
reform  of  1867  in,  176,  177;  rela- 
tions of  with  Canada,  178-80;  with 
Ireland,  180-2;  with  India,  183; 
with  Europe,  183,  185,  186;  with 
the  United  States,  183-5;  with 
Russia,  186;  relations  of,  with  the 
German  Empire,  364,  368-75; 
with  the  Triple  Alliance,  364; 
naval  policy  of,  369;  abandons  the 
policy  of  "splendid  isolation," 
370,  371;  supremacy  of  on  the  seas, 
371;  policy  of  concerning  France, 
374;  efforts  of  to  reach  an  under- 
standing with  the  German  Empire, 
374,  375;  constitution  of,  884;  in 
the  Affair  of  1875,  394;  relations  of 
with  France,  397,  398;  woman 
suffrage  movement  in,  402,  403; 
extension  of  the  franchise  in,  404; 
education  in,  404,  405;  social  and 
economic  reforms  in,  405,  406; 
trade  unions  in,  406,  407;  labor  in, 
407,  408;  poverty  in,  408,  409; 
land  holding  in,  409;  lessening  of 
the  power  of  the  House  of  Lords  in, 
409-11;  relations  of  with  Ireland, 
411-16;  foreign  relations  of,  416, 
417;  defends  Tm-key  against  Rus- 
sia, 448,  449;  recognizes  the  in- 
dependence of  Greece,  451;  alleged 
diplomacy  of,  494;  makes  the 
Entente  Cordiale  with  France,  495, 
496,  497;  makes  an  agreement  with 
Russia,  499;  in  the  Second  Morocco 
Crisis,  504-9;  in  the  Balkan  Crisis 
of  1912-13,  509;  rivalry  of  with 
the  German  Empire,  519-20; 
efforts  of  to  keep  the  peace  in  1914, 
528;  wishes  to  avoid  entering  the 
Great  War,  530;  declares  war  on 
the  German  Empire,  532;  terrible 
bm-dens  of,  668;  national  debt  of. 


Great  Russians,  422. 

Great  War,  the  German  army  in,  324; 
social  betterment  temporarily  ended 
by,  344;  heals  religious  divisions 
in  France,  391,  392;  Servia  in,  464; 
Greece  in,  465;  Rumania  in,  467; 
Bulgaria  in,  470;  possibility  of  ^ 
doubted,  513;  causes  of,  514-26;  \60li 
immediate  causes  of,  526-9;  be- 
ginning of,  529-32;  declarations  of 
hostilities  in,  534;  opposing  forces  in, 
534;  German  plan  in,  540;  course  of, 
541-73;  French  fail  in  Alsace-Lor- 
raine, 541;  Germans  conquer  Bel- 
gium, 542;  drive  back  the  French, 
543;  Battle  of  the  Marne,  544,  545; 
of  the  Aisne,  545;  struggle  for  the 
Channel  ports,  548;  Russians  de- 
feat the  Austrians,  549;  defeated 
in  East  Prussia,  549,  Russians  de- 
feated at  the  Dunajec,  550;  great 
Russian  retreat,  551;  Servia  con- 
quered, 551,  552;  Allies  fail  at 
Gallipoli,  552,  553;  Allies  control 
the  sea,  553,  554;  Battle  of  Jutland, 
554;  work  of  the  British  Grand 
Fleet,  554,  555;  Allies  fail  on  the 
land,    555,   556;  Siege   of   Verdim, 

556,  557;    Battle   of   the   Somme, 

557,  558;  Allied  success  in  1916, 
558;  Rumania  conquered,  558, 
559;  submarine  warfare,  559-61, 
563,  564,  567,  568;  Allied  failures 
in  1917,  561;  collapse  of  Russia, 
562,  563;  Italians  defeated  at 
Caporetto,  563;  the  United  States 
joins  the  Allies,  564-7;  German 
offensive  of  1918,  568-70;  successful 
Allied  offensive,  570-3;  Bulgaria 
surrenders,  571;  Tvu-key  surrenders, 
571,  572;  Italy  defeats  Austria,  572; 
Germany  sm-renders,  573;  cost  of, 
581;  settlement  of,  576-92;  results 
of,  593-8;  effects  of   upon   Russia, 

600,601.  Goitr  7 

Great  Western,  117,  613. 

Greece,  obtains  independence,  451; 
declares  war  on  Turkey,  457;  vic- 
tories of  in  the  First  Balkan  War, 
458;  in  the  Second  Balkan  War, 
460;  history  of,  464,  465;  domestic 
affairs,  465,  466;  position  of  in  1913, 
510. 

Greek  Catholic  Church,  639,  640. 

Greek  Language,  Modern,  465. 

Greeks,  position  of,  450;  revolt  of 
against  the  Turks,  450. 

Greenland,  309. 


674 


INDEX 


Gregory  VII,  Pope,  341. 

Grey,  Sir  Edward,  375;  on  the  Aus- 
trian note,  526,  527;  efforts  of  to 
keep  the  peace  in  1914,  628,  530. 

Grieg,  627. 

Guadeloupe,  483. 

Guesde,  Jules,  137. 

Guillotine,  60. 

Guizot,  196. 

Gustavus  Adolphus,  306. 

Habeas  Corpus,  45. 

Haeckel,  643,  645. 

Hague  Peace  Conferences,  374, 
648. 

Hague  Tribunal,  648. 

Haldane,  Lord,  374. 

Hamburg-America  Steamship  Com- 
pany, 338. 

Hanotaux,  496. 

Hanover,  238,  244. 

Hanseatic  League,  9,  337. 

Hapsburg,  House  of,  214;  dominions 
of,  215;  motto  of,  439;  ending  of, 
441,  442. 

Hardenberg,  315. 

Hardy,  Thomas,  625. 

Hargreaves.  James,  115. 

Harrison,  Frederic,  on  Prussia,  313. 

Haydn,  626. 

Heating,  610. 

Hubert,  61. 

Heine,  Heinrich,  on  the  Ukraine,  365. 

Heligoland,  476,  478,  553,  587. 

Helmholtz,  618. 

Helvetic  Republic,  304. 

Herder,  624. 

Herring  Fisheries,  299. 

Herschell,  Sir  John,  619. 

Herzegovina,  355,  451,  455,  500. 

Hesse-Cassel,  244. 

Hesse-Darmstadt,  244. 

Hetairia  PhUike,  450. 

HiU,  Rowland,  172. 

Hindenburg,  von,  549. 

Hindenburg  Line,  571,  572. 

Historical  Writing,  in  the  nineteenth 
century,  625. 

Hohenlinden,  Battle  of,  73. 

Holland,  Kingdom  of,  Belgium  separ- 
ates from,  300;  in  the  nineteenth 
century,  301,  302;  colonies  of,  301, 
302. 

Holy  Alliance,  purpose  of,  93;  origin 
of,  98,  99;  Great  Britain  refuses 
assent  to,  99;  eflfects  of,  99,  100; 
confused  with  the  Quadruple  Al- 
liance, 99;  purpose  of,  272. 


"Holy  Alliance,"  attitude  of  toward 
Spain,  104;  working  of,  586. 

Holy  Iloman  Empire,  in  the  eigh- 
teenth century,  17;  origin  of,  213, 
214;  constitution  of,  214,  215; 
unity  not  achieved  in,  215,  216; 
end  of,  216. 

Holy  Synod,  268,  419,  426. 

Home  Rule.  Irish,  413,  414. 

Honduras,  475. 

Hong  Kong,  479. 

Homer,  Francis,  on  Napoleon's  power, 
67. 

Hours  of  Labor,  130,  169. 

House  of  Commons,  British,  unre- 
formed,  163,  164. 

House  of  Lords,  contest  of  with  the 
House  of  Commons,  410,  411; 
lessening  of  the  power  of,  411. 

Howe,  Elias,  612. 

Hugo,  Victor,  624,  625. 

Human  Body,  study  of,  622. 

Humanitarianism,  in  France  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  45. 

"Hundred  Days,"  89. 

Hundred  Years'  War,  378. 

Hungary,  peoples  in,  231;  conditions 
in,  232;  Revolution  of  1848  in,  232, 
233;  nationalism  in,  232;  racial 
troubles  in,  234;  declares  inde- 
pendence, 235;  reconquered,  235; 
constitution  of  annulled,  245;  con- 
cessions to,  246,  enters  the  Aus- 
gleich,  246;  relations  of  with  Austria, 
440,  441;  government  of,  443;  after 
the  Great  War,  590;  in  1919-20,  594. 

Hunger  Strike,  403. 

Hutton,  James,  637. 

Huxley,  Thomas,  638. 

Iceland,  309. 

Ikons,  640. 

Illumination,  610,  611. 

Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Virgin, 

644. 
Imperialism,  490-2. 
Impressionism,  630. 
Indemnity,   paid  by   France  to  the 

German  Empire,  380;  imposed  upon 

the  German  Republic  by  the  Treaty 

of  Versailles,  588. 
Independent  Labor  Party,  137,  407. 
India,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  13; 

acquired  by  the  English,  182,  183; 

mutiny  in,  183;  taken  over  by  the 

British  government,  183;  defence  ot 

480.  481. 
Indian  Mutiny,  476. 


INDEX 


675 


Indians,  in  Spanish  America,  30. 

Industrial  Disorders,  505. 

Industrial  Growth,  in  the  German 
Empire,  causes  of,  336,  337. 

Industrial  Organization  revolution- 
ized by  the  Industrial  Revolution, 
124. 

Industrial  Revolution,  in  Great 
Britain,  14,  41;  conditions  preced- 
ing, 110,  111;  great  changes  pro- 
duced by,  112,  113;  beginning  of  in 
western  Europe,  113;  in  Great 
Britain,  113-18,  156;  in  France, 
118;  in  central  Europe,  118,  224, 
240;  in  the  German  Empire,  118, 
119;  in  Russia,  119,  428,  429;  ef- 
fects of,  120  ff.;  working  conditions 
caused  by,  126;  accompanied  by 
laissez-faire,  127;  new  upper  class 
created  by,  127;  depresses  the 
workers  at  first,  128,  130;  followed 
by  socialism,  131;  effects  of  upon 
democracy,  142;  upon  the  position 
of  women,  143;  in  Sweden,  307; 
effects  of  upon  religious  beliefs,  642. 

I.  W.  W.  (Industrial  Workers  of  the 
World),  141. 

Infallibility,  Papal,  Doctrine  of,  340. 

Initiative,  305,  306. 

Inquisition,  in  America,  29;  in  the 
Papal  States,  252;  in  Spain,  295. 

International  Association  of  the 
Congo,  490. 

Internationale,  135,  136. 

Ionian  Islands,  464. 

Ireland,  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
14;  Catholics  in  allowed  to  vote, 
162;  agitation  in  for  Catholic  en- 
franchisement, 163;  famine  in, 
175,  182;  relations  of  with  England, 
180,  181;  subjection  of,  181;  union 
of  with  Great  Britain,  181;  misery 
of  in  the  nineteenth  century,  182; 
Gaelic  language  in,  348;  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  411,  412;  bet- 
terment of  conditions  in,  412,  413; 
Home  Rule  movement  in,  413,  414; 
Sinn  Fein  movement  in,  414,  415; 
republic  proclaimed  in,  415,  416. 

Irish  Convention,  415. 

Irish  Literary  Revival,  414. 

Irish  Nationalist  Party,  413. 

Irish  Question,  180-2. 

Irish  Republic,  proclaimed,  415,  416. 

Iron,  in  Great  Britain,  117;  in  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  336. 

Ironclads,  621. 

Isabel  II,  of  Spain,  296. 


Istria,  442. 

Italia  Irredenta,  26f ,  58f . 

Italian  Colonies,  487,  488. 

Italian  Frontier,  Question  of,  582. 

Italian  High  Renaissance,  Style,  628. 

Italians,  defeated  at  Caporetto,  568; 
great  victory  of  over  the  Austrlans, 
572. 

Italy,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  16; 
left  divided  by  the  Congress  of 
Vienna,  96;  Revolution  of  1848  in, 
230;  reconquered,  233;  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  nineteenth  century, 
249;  earlier  history  of,  250;  af- 
fected by  the  Revolution  and  by 
Napoleon,  250,  251;  by  the  Con- 
gress of  Vienna,  251,  252;  con- 
dition of  the  people  in,  252,  253; 
Risorgimento  in,  254,  255;  Revolu- 
tion of  1848  in,  255,  256,  257;  un- 
ification of,  259-62;  government  of, 
262,  263;  progress  in,  263,  264; 
illiteracy  in,  263;  foreign  policy  of, 
263;  relations  of  with  Austria- 
Hungary,  356;  with  France,  356, 
357;  enters  the  Triple  Alliance, 
357;  desires  Tunisia,  357;  seizes 
Tripoli,  455;  refuses  to  join  in  ac- 
tion against  Servia,  511;  joins  the 
Allies,  555,  556;  in  1919-20,  593. 

Jacobins,  52,  54,  60,  61. 

Jacquerie,  7,  378. 

Jahn,  224. 

Jamaica,  475. 

Janina,  459. 

Janissaries,  447. 

Japan,  rise  of,  430;  defeats  Russia 

in  the  Russo-Japanese  War,  431-3 ; 

geographical  position  of,   515;   in 

1919-20, 596. 
Japanese,  capture  Tsingtao,  554. 
Jaures,  Jean,  137. 
Java,  489. 
Jellacic,  235. 
Jena,  Battle  of,  81. 
Jerusalem,  365. 
Jewish  Pale,  426. 
Jews,  in  Spain,  294;  in  Russia,   425; 

treatment  of,  426. 
Jesuits,  193,  341. 
Joffre,  543,  544. 

Josephine,  wife  of  Napoleon,  85. 
Joule,  James,  618. 
Judicial  System,  reformed  in  Russia, 

284. 
Jugo-Slavs,   question   of,   583.      See 

South  Slavs. 


676 


INDEX 


Jugo-SIavia,  464,  589,  590,  596. 
Julius  Caesar,  70. 
July  Ordinances,  194. 
Junkers,  332,  335. 
Jutland,  Battle  of,  554. 

Kaiser,  position  of,  332. 

Kamerun,  486. 

Kant,  Immanuel,  18,  98. 

Kapiial  Das,  134. 

Kara  George,  462. 

Kay,  John,  115. 

Keats,  625. 

Kelvin,  Lord,  618. 

Kepler.  686. 

Kerensky,  602,  604. 

Kiao-chau,  430,  486. 

Kiel  Canal,  308,  553,  588. 

Kiev,  266. 

Kingdom  of  Holland  (1800),  299. 

Kingdom  of  Italy  (1805),  251,  (1861), 
261. 

Kingdom  of  Naples,  251. 

Kings,  in  the  old  r6gime,  11;  of  Eng- 
land, 11,  12. 

Kingsley,  Charles,  139. 

Kipling,  Rudyard,  on  the  British 
Empire,  473. 

Kirchoff,  619. 

Kirk-Kilisse,  Battle  of,  458. 

Kitchener,  478. 

Kluck,  von,  543. 

Knights  of  the  Empire,  213,  216. 

Kolchak,  Admiral,  605. 

Koniggratz,  Battle  of,  319,  320. 

Konigsberg,  18. 

Korea,  431. 

Kossuth,  Louis,  232,  235. 

Kotzebue,  223. 

Koweit,  366. 

Kriegsbrauck  im  Landkriege,  648. 

Kuchuk  Kainarji,  Treaty  of,  269. 

Kvlturkampf,  340,  341,  342. 

Kumanovo,  Battle  of,  458. 

Kutusov,  87. 

Labor,  Power  of  in  Great  Britain,  407, 
408. 

Laibach,  Congress  of,  102. 

Laissez-jaire,  126;  abandoned,  130; 
hinders  factory  legislation  in  Great 
Britain,    169;    Bismarck    on,    337. 

Lamartine,  on  Napoleon's  grave, 
67;  on  the  feeling  of  the  French  peo- 
ple, 198;  as  a  writer,  625. 

Lanmienais,  Abbe,  139. 

Lamps,  611. 

Land  of  France,  gets  into  the  pos- 


session of  the  peasants,  62,  392. 

Land  Captains,  420. 

Land  Reform  Laws  in  Lreland,  412, 
413. 

Landholding,  in  France,  392;  in  Great 
Britain,  409;  in  Rumania,  468. 

Landsturm,  315. 

Landtag  (Prussian),  refuses  appropria- 
tions for  army  increase,  241;  dis- 
regarded by  Bismarck,  242,  243. 

Landwehr,  315,  316. 

Language,  difficulties  about  in  Aus- 
tria-Hungary, 440,  441. 

Laon,  557. 

La  Place,  637. 

Lapps,  424. 

Lasalle,  Ferdinand,  136. 

Latin  America,  government  in,  37. 

Laud,  Archbishop,  30. 

Lavoisier,  619. 

Law,  codified  in  France,  75,  76. 

Law  of  Associations,  390. 

Law  of  the  Papal  Guarantees,  262. 

League  of  Nations,  579,  585,  586;  not 
accepted  by  the  United  States,  592. 

Le  Bon,  60. 

Legislative  Assembly,  French,  54. 

Legitimists,  381. 

Leipzig,  Battle  of,  88. 

Lenine,  Nicolai,  [V.  I.  Ulianov],  60; 
in  the  Revolution  of  1917,  602,  604, 
605. 

Lens,  587. 

Leo  XIII,  Pope,  denounces  socialism, 
139. 

Leopold,  Prince,  of  HohenzoUern,  321. 

Leopold  II,  of  Austria,  54. 

Leopold  II,  King  of  Belgimn,  490. 

Lepanto,  Battle  of,  446. 

Lesseps,  de,  Ferdinand,  477. 

Letters,  sending  of,  614. 

Letts,  424. 

Levasseur,  on  the  population  of 
Europe,  120. 

Levellers,  131. 

Liao-yang,  Battle  of,  431,  432. 

Liberal  Empire,  209,  210. 

Liberal  Party,  advocates  reforms  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  405,  406. 

Liberum  Veto,  269. 

Liebknecht,  Wilhelm,  136,  342. 

Li^ge,  capture  of,  542. 

Light,  ideas  about,  618,  619. 

Liliencron,  Detlev  von,  on  Germany's 
wars,  313. 

Limitation  of  armaments,  opposed  by 
Germany,  374. 

Lister,  Lord,  623. 


INDEX 


677 


Literature,  in  Europe,  since  the 
French  Revolution,  62^5. 

Lithuanians,  422. 

Living  Conditions,  in  the  Europe  of 
the  old  regime,  4. 

Livingstone,  489,  490. 

Livonia,  424. 

Local  Government,  under  the  French 
constitution  of  1791,  53;  in  Great 
Britain,  170,  171;  reformed  in  Rus- 
sia, 285;  reformed  in  France,  380, 
381,  384,  385;  in  England,  384; 
in  France,  384,  385. 

Locomotive,  invention  of,  612,  613. 

Lombardy,  in  the  possession  of  Aus- 
tria, 95,  251;  ceded  to  the  Kingdom 
of  Sardinia,  259. 

London,  population  of,  9;  importance 
of,  10;  Napoleon  on,  79;  interna- 
tional conference  at,  451. 

London  Company,  32. 

London  Protocol,  317. 

London  Times,  614. 

London,  Treaty  of,  1913,  459. 

Lorraine,  323,  326. 

Lorraine,  Claude,  629. 

Louis  XIV,  King  of  France,  11,  88. 

Louis  XVI,  character  of,  47;  takes 
refuge  with  the  Legislative  As- 
sembly, 55;  deposed  and  put  to 
death,  56. 

Louis  XVIII,  190-2. 

Louis  Philippe,  195-200. 

Lou  vain,  564. 

Lowe,  Robert,  404. 

Lucca,  251. 

Lucretius,  637. 

LUderitz,  486. 

LUle-Bm-gas,  Battle  of,  458. 

Lun^ville,  Treaty  of,  73. 

Lusitania,  559. 

Luther,  on  the  German  nation, 
212. 

LUtzen,  Battle  of,  88. 

Luxemburg,  neutralization  of,  320; 
neutrality  of  violated  by  Germany, 
531. 

Lvov,  Prince,  602,  604. 

Lyell,  Sir  Charles,  637,  643. 

Lyons,  60. 

Macaulay,  T.  B.,  on  rule  by  the  upper 

classes,  146. 
Macedonia,  456,  457,  469. 
Machine  Guns,  621. 
Mac  Mahon,  323,  324. 
Madagascar,  484. 
Magenta,  Battle  of,  207. 


Magna  Carta,  in  America,  32. 

Magyars,  234. 

Makdi,  478. 

Malta,  79,  476. 

Manchuria,  430. 

Manet,  630. 

Manhood  Suffrage,  in  France,  1792, 
55;  in  the  North  German  Confedera- 
tion, 177;  in  France,  1848,  201; 
uaider  the  Second  Empire,  205;  in 
Austria,  1848,  225,  226;'  in  Italy,  in 
1912,  263;  in  the  German  Empu-e, 
330. 

Manorial  Dues,  in  France  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  43. 

Manorial  System,  273. 

Mantua,  68. 

Marat,  53,  61. 

March  Laws,  232,  246. 

Marconi,  615. 

Marengo,  Battle  of,  73. 

Marie  Antoinette,  54,  60. 

Marne,  Battle  of  the,  544,  545. 

Marne,  Second  Battle  of  the,  570. 

Marseillaise,  55,  348. 

Marseilles,  60. 

Martinique,  483. 

Marx,  Karl,  134,  135;  on  the  Parlia- 
ment of  Frankfort,  227. 

Maryland,  26. 

Massachusetts,  25. 

Matches,  611. 

Mathematics,  617. 

Maximiliau,  Emperor  of  Mexico,  208, 
441. 

Mazzini,  on  the  condition  of  the 
Italians,  249;  career  of,  254,  255, 
256. 

Mediterranean  Sea,  366,  516. 

Mehemet  AH,  458. 

Mensheviki,  602, 

Mercenaries,  314. 

Meredith,  625. 

Merrimac,  621. 

Mesopotamia,  487. 

Messines,  561. 

Methuen  Treaty,  84,  292. 

Metternich,  Clemens,  Prince,  causes 
the  adoption  of  the  Protocol  of 
Troppau,  103;  assisted  by  Alexander 
I,  103;  career  of,  105-8;  attitude  of 
toward  the  Germanics,  218;  system 
of  in  Central  Europe,  222;  on  Italy, 
254. 

Metternich,  Age  of,  276. 

Metz,  324,  325. 

Meunier,  629. 

Mexico,  208. 


678 


INDEX 


Middle  Europe,  867,  522. 

Milan  Decree,  83. 

Militarism,  in  the  German  Empire, 

347;  growth  of  in  Europe,  362. 
Military  Convention,  between  Russia 

and  France,  396. 
Military  Law  of  Boyen,  315. 
Miliukov,  Paul,  435,  602,  604. 
Mill,  John  Stuart,  176;  on  birth  rate 

in  France,  392;  advocates  woman's 

suffrage,  402. 
Millet,  630. 
Milton,  on  the  greatness  of  England, 

400;  as  a  writer,  635. 
Ministerial     Government,     330;     in 

France,  382. 
Mir,  273,  283,  285. 
Mirabeau,  49. 
Mischoz,  Battle  of,  462. 
Mitrailleuse,  621. 
Modena,  251,  259. 
Modernism,  644. 
Mohdcs,  Battle  of,  231. 
Mohammedans,  in  the  British  Empire, 

482. 
Moltke,  von,  316,  324,  on  war,  524. 
Moluccas,  the,  292,  301,  489. 
Monarchists,  in  France,  387,  388. 
Monasteries,   in  France,   suppressed, 

50,  390. 
Monet,  630. 
Mongols,  266. 
Monitor,  621. 
Monroe  Doctrine,  104,  158,  208,  487, 

521. 
Mons,  Battle  of,  543. 
Montdidier,  571. 
Montenegro,  makes  war  on  Turkey, 

452,    457;    history    of,    460,    462; 

yields  to  the  Powers,  510. 
Montesquieu,  2,  45. 
Moors,  in  Spain,  294. 
Moravia,  442. 
Moreau,  73. 
Morocco,     French    protectorate     in, 

484;  strategic  position  of,  506. 
Morocco  Crisis  (1905),  497-9. 
Morocco  Crisis  (1911),  504-9. 
Morris,  William  137. 
Moscow,  87,  265,  266,  395. 
"Mountain,"  The,  54. 
Moving  Pictures,  616. 
Mozambique,  489. 
Mozart,  626,  627. 
Mukden,  Battle  of,  432,  497. 
Munich,  593. 
Municipal  Corporations  Act,  of  1835, 

171. 


Municipal  Government,  835. 

Muscovy,  267. 

Music,  development  of,  625-8. 

Namur,  542. 

Nantes,  terror  in,  60. 

Naples,  revolution  in,  in  1820,  103. 

Napoleon  Bonaparte,  Napoleon  I, 
Spanish  colonies  affected  by  the 
work  of,  36;  in  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, 64;  on  the  mastery  of  the 
world,  67;  family  and  youth  of, 
67,  68;  plans  attack  upon  Austria, 
68;  Italian  campaign  of,  1797,  68, 
69;  dictates  the  Peace  of  Campo- 
Formio,  69;  appearance  and  char- 
acter of,  69,  70;  military  greatness 
of,  70,  71;  assisted  by  the  French 
Revolution,  71,  72;  expedition  of  to 
Egypt,  72;  overthrows  the  Direc- 
tory, 73;  conquers  the  Second  Coali- 
tion, 73;  makes  the  Treaty  of 
Amiens  with  Great  Britain,  73; 
First  Consul,  74;  financial  reforms 
of,  74;  makes  Concordat  with  Rome, 
75;  codifies  the  law,  75,  76;  educa- 
tion in  France  reformed  by,  76; 
makes  internal  improvements,  76; 
position  of  in  1802,  77;  Emperor, 
77;  policy  of,  77-9;  relations  of 
with  Great  Britain,  79;  overcomes 
the  Third  Coalition,  80;  conquers 
Austria,  80;  fails  to  get  control  of 
the  sea,  80,  81;  conquers  Prussia, 
81;  defeats  the  Russians,  81;  em- 
pire of,  82,  83;  conquers  Spain, 
84,  295;  greatness  of  the  empire 
of,  85;  prepares  an  invasion  of  Rus- 
sia, 86,  87;  attacked  by  the  Sixth 
Coalition,  87;  defeated,  88;  refuses 
any  compromise,  88;  defeated  in 
1814,  88,  89;  sent  to  Elba,  89; 
returns  to  France,  89;  defeated  at 
Waterloo,  89;  dies  at  St.  Helena, 
89;  estimate  of,  90,  91;  on  aristoc- 
racy, 127;  legend  concerning,  203, 
204;  work  of  in  Italy,  251;  on  Con- 
stantinople, 280;  limits  the  Prus- 
sian army,  315;  treatment  of  the 
Church  by,  641;  treatment  of  the 
Pope  by,  641. 

Napoleon  III,  government  and  posi- 
tion of,  205,  206;  policy  of,  207; 
assists  the  Rumanians,  207,  466; 
assists  the  Italians,  207;  failure  of  in 
Mexico,  208;  relations  of  with 
Bismarck,  208,  209;  policy  of  con- 
cerning the  Germanics,  209;  con- 


INDEX 


679 


cerning  Belgium,  209;  fall  of,  209; 
government  of  in  later  years,  210; 
policy  of  in  Italy,  258;  makes  war 
on  Austria,  258,  259;  attitude  of 
toward  Italian  unity,  259;  un- 
successful diplomacy  of,  320;  in  the 
Franco- Prussian  War,  323,  324; 
gives  support  to  the  Pope,  356. 

Napoleonic  Empire,  82,  85,  86. 

Nassau,  244. 

Natal,  478. 

National  Armies,  315. 

National  Assembly,  French,  1789, 
49-53;  1871,  381,  382. 

National  Convention,  French,  55,  56. 

National  Debt,  of  Gr,eat  Britain  in 
1815,  155;  of  European  nations  in 
1919-20,  597,  598. 

National  Guard,  49,  51,  201,  202. 

National  Insurance  Act,  406. 

National  Wealth,  339. 

National  Workshops,  201,  202. 

National  Unity,  desire  for,  421,  425, 
426. 

Nationalism,  saves  the  French  Re- 
volution, 57;  development  of,  57, 
58;  in  the  French  Revolution,  58, 
59;  in  Europe,  59;  relation  of  to 
socialism,  135,  136;  in  Italy,  259; 
in  Russia,  426,  427,  608;  in  Turkey, 
457;  in  France,  606. 

Nationalization  of  Industries  and 
Utilities,  133,  134. 

Nations,  idea  of,  58. 

"Naval  Holiday,"  374. 

Naval  Panic  of  1909,  373. 

Navarino,  Battle  of,  451. 

Navigation  Acts,  33. 

Necker,  48. 

Nekrasov,  on  Russia,  265. 

Nelson,  Lord,  80. 

Nepal,  480. 

Netherlands,  298,  302. 

Netherlands,  Austrian,  302. 

Netherlands,  Dutch,  annexed  to 
France,  85;  obtain  independence, 
298,  299;  in  the  eighteenth  centiu-y, 
299;  during  the  French  Revolution, 
299. 

Netherlands,  Spanish,  302. 

Neutrality,  of  Belgium  and  of  Luxem- 
burg, violated  by  Germany,  531. 

Neutralization,  of  Belgium,  303;  of 
Luxembm"g,  320;  of  Switzerland, 
96,  304. 

Neuve  Chapelle,  Battle  of,  556. 

New  Brunswick,  475. 

New  England,  31. 


New  France,  30. 

New  Guinea,  489. 

New  Jersey,  woman's  suffrage  in,  401. 

New  Netherland,  25,  26. 

New  South  Wales,  476. 

New  York  Tribune,  on  the  Treaty  of 
Versailles,  576. 

New  Zealand,  482. 

Newcastle,  116. 

Newcomen,  Thomas,  116. 

Newfoundland,  25,  475. 

News,  communication  of,  614. 

Newspapers,  614. 

Nice,  obtained  by  France,  207,  259. 

Nicholas  I,  Tsar  of  Russia,  character 
of,  275,  276;  purpose  of,  276;  or- 
ganizes repression,  276,  277;  crushes 
the  Polish  rebellion,  278;  on  the 
breaking  up  of  Turkey,  280. 

Nicholas  II.  character  of,  427,  428; 
reign  of  428-37;  decree  of  abdica- 
tion of,  600;  abdication  of,  601; 
death  of,  605;  proposes  the  Hague 
Peace  Conferences,  648. 

Niemen  River,  87. 

Nihilism,  288. 

Nihilists,  420,  421. 

Nile,  Battle  of,  72. 

Ninth  Symphony,  626. 

Nobility,  10,  11,  42. 

North  German  Confederation,  244, 
330. 

North  German  Lloyd  Steamship 
Company,  338. 

Northmen,  306. 

Nova  Scotia,  475. 

Norway  in  the  eighteenth  centiu-y, 
16;  under  the  rule  of  Sweden,  95; 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  307; 
neutralization  of,  308;  separates 
from  Sweden,  308. 

Notables,  summoned  in  France,  48. 

Novara,  Battle  of,  256. 

Novel,  625. 

Novi-Bazar,  Sandjak  (province)  of, 
463. 

Le  Nozze  di  Figaro,  627. 

Nystad,  Treaty  of,  269. 

Obrenovich,  Milosh,  462. 

O'Connell,  Daniel,  163. 

October  Manifesto,  434,  435. 

Octobrists,  435. 

"Odysseus"   [Sir    Charles    Eliot,  on 

Turkey  in  Europe,  439. 
Oersted,  619. 

Old  Age  Insurance  Law,  344. 
Old  Age  Pension  Act,  406. 


680 


INDEX 


Ollivier,    l^mile,    on   German  unity, 

845. 
OlmUte,  Convention  of,  286. 
Omdurman,  Battle  of,  478. 
Ontario,  476. 
"Opium  War,"  479. 
Orange  Free  State,  478. 
Orders  in  Council,  84. 
Origin  of  Species,  184. 
Orlando,   at   the  Congress  of   Paris, 

1919,  580,  585. 
Osman  Pasha,  452. 
Ottoman  Empire,  see  Turkey. 
Ovid,  265. 
Owen,  Robert,  182. 
Oxford,  404. 

Painting,  since  the  French  Revolution, 
629,  630. 

Pan-Germanism,  427. 

Pan-Slavic  Congress,  1848,  281. 

Pan-Slavism,  427,  520. 

Pankhurst,  Mrs.,  403. 

Papal  Infallibility,  Doctrine  of,  644. 

Papal  States,  250,  252,  262. 

Papineau,  Joseph,  178, 

Paris,  population  of,  9;  in  the  French 
Revolution,  10;  saves  the  National 
Assembly,  49;  Siege  of,  325;  sur- 
render of,  826;  suffering  in,  378, 
379;  Commune  in,  378-80. 

Paris,  Treaty  of,  1814,  93;  1856,  206. 

Parliament,  British,  before  1832,  150. 

Parliament,  of  England,  12. 

Parliament  Law  of  1911,  411. 

Parliamentary  Reform,  in  Great 
Britain,  desire  for,  160;  carried 
through  in  1832,  163-5;  effects  of, 
166. 

Parliamentary  Reform  Law,  of  1832, 
165,  166;  of  1867,  176,  177;  of  1884, 
400;  of  1918,  404. 

Parma,  251,  259. 

Pamell,  C.  S.,  413. 

Party  System,  383. 

Parzifd,  627. 

Pasteur,  622. 

Peasants,  6,  7;  rebellions  of,  7;  in 
France  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
48;  rise  against  theb  lords,  50; 
obtain  lands,  62;  support  the  French 
Revolution,  62;  become  conserva- 
tive, 62,  63;  in  Russia,  273;  owner- 
ship of  lands  by  in  Ireland,  412,  413. 

Peel,  Sir  Robert,  162,  168,  175. 

Penn,  William,  26,  98. 

Penny  Postage,  in  Great  Britain,  171, 
172. 


P6ronne,  557. 

Perseus,  628. 

Persia,  480. 

Persian  Gulf,  366. 

Peter  I,  the  Great,  Tsar  of  Russia, 
19,  268,  269. 

Petrograd,  601. 

Plehve,  von,  421,  428,  433. 

Philip  II,  King  of  Spain,  11. 

Phonographs,  616. 

Photography,  616. 

Physics,  618. 

Picardy,  Battle  of,  569. 

Pictures,  615. 

Piedmont,  257. 

Pitt,  William,  80,  158. 

Pius  VII,  Pope,  641. 

Pius  IX,  Pope,  denounces  socialism, 
139;  accession  of,  255;  in  the 
Revolution  of  1848,  256;  on  the  new 
ideas,  644. 

Plevna,  452. 

Plombi^res,  Conference  of,  258. 

Pobiedonostsev,  Konstantin,  doc- 
trines of,  419,  420;  under  Nicholas 
II,  428;  dismissed,  434. 

Pocket  Boroughs,  150. 

Poetry,  since  the  French  Revolution, 
625. 

Poland,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  18; 
partition  of,  18,  270;  in  earlier  times, 
266;  checked  by  the  Russians,  268; 
conditions  in,  269,  270;  Kingdom  of 
(1815),  277;  under  Alexander  I, 
277,  278;  rebellion  of,  278,  286;  con- 
dition of  peasants  in,  286,  287; 
changes  in,  287;  culture  of  in  west- 
ern Russia,  422;  question  of,  583; 
independence  of  recognized,  587; 
prospects  of,  596. 

Poles,  in  the  German  Empire,  349, 
350;  in  Russia,  424,  426. 

Police  Force,  established  in  London, 
162. 

Polignac,  Prince  de,  194. 

Polish  "Corridor,"  587. 

Political  Parties,  in  the  French  Na- 
tional Assembly,  51;  in  France,  383. 

Pomerania,  Eastern,  held  by  Sweden, 
16;  obtained  by  Prussia,  95. 

Poor  Law  of  1834,  170. 

Poor  Relief,  in  England,  169;  reform 
of  in  Great  Britain,  170. 

Pope,  condemns  religious  legislation 
in  France,  391. 

Popes,  relations  of  with  the  Italian 
government,  262;  loss  of  the  Papal 
States  by,  262. 


INDEX 


681 


Population,  growth  of,  339;  oi  the 
British  Empire,  481;  room  for  in- 
crease of,  517;  increase  of,  517,  518, 

Port  Arthur,  430,  431,  432. 

Portsmouth,  Treaty  of,  433. 

Portugal,  early  advantage  of  in  co- 
lonial enterprise,  24;  closely  bound 
to  England,  84;  overrun  by  the 
French,  84;  earlier  history  of,  291, 
292;  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
292,  293;  republic  established  in, 
293;  colonies  of,  293,  488,  489. 

Portuguese  East  Africa,  489. 

Posen,  349,  421,  587. 

Post,  in  Great  Britain,  172. 

Potsdam  Accord,  502. 

Poussin,  629. 

Poverty,  in  Great  Britain,  408. 

Prague,  Treaty  of,  243,  319. 

Presburg,  Treaty  of,  80. 

Priestley,  619. 

Prince  Edward  Island,  476. 

Prisons,  647. 

Privateering,  abolition  of,  647. 

Privy  Council,  in  England,  149. 

Production,  increase  of,  608,  609. 

Profit  Sharing,  132. 

Protection,  in  the  German  Empire, 
337. 

Protestant  Chiu-ches,  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  645,  646. 

Protestants,  in  France,  45. 

Proudhon,  139. 

Prussia,  in  the  eighteenth  centm-y, 
17;  conquered  by  Napoleon,  81; 
reforms  in,  86;  rises  against  Na- 
poleon, 87;  obtains  west  German 
lands,  95;  obtains  part  of  Saxony, 
97;  Revolution  of  1848  in,  226; 
constitution  granted  in,  226;  head- 
ship of  German  Empire  offered  to, 
228;  undertakes  to  establish  a 
German  union,  236;  rise  of,  236, 
237;  territorial  growth  of,  237; 
reforms  in,  237;  organizes  the 
Zollverein,  238;  struggle  in  over  in- 
crease of  the  army,  241;  army  of 
strengthened,  243;  conquers  Den- 
mark, 243,  317;  overthrows  Austria, 
243,  318,  319;  establishes  the  North 
German  Confederation,  244;  estab- 
lishes the  German  Empire,  244, 
245;  conquers  France,  244;  offers 
help  to  Russia,  286;  army  of  before 
the  nineteenth  century,  314;  uni- 
versal military  service  developed 
in,  315-17;  army  of  increased,  316; 
army  of  in  1866,  318;  in  the  Franco- 


Prussian  War,  323;  government  of, 

331.  332. 
Prussian    Guard,    defeated    at    the 

Marne,  544. 
Prussisch-Eylau,  Battle  of,  81. 
Przemysl,  550. 

Public  Ownership  of  Utilities,  133. 
Public  Record  Office,  114. 
"Public  Schools,"  404. 
Puritans,  25,  30,  31. 

Quadrilateral,  233,  256. 
Quadruple     Alliance     ("Holy     Alli- 
ance"), 100,  101,  296. 
Quakers,  401. 
Quanta  Cur  a,  644. 
Quebec,  476. 
Qu'est-ce  que  la  PropriStS,  139. 

Racial  Superiority,  belief  in  among  the 

Germans,  523. 
Radetzky,  233,  256. 
Railroads,  in  war,  537. 
Railway  Trains,  117. 
Railways,  in  war,  316,  development 

of,  612,  613. 
Reading,  increase  of,  614. 
Rebellion  of  1837,  in  Canada,  178. 
Reciprocity  Treaty,  between  Canada 

and  the  United  States,  failure  to 

pass,  180. 
Red  Cross  Society,  647. 
"Red  Sunday,"  434. 
Redistribution  Act,  401. 
Redmond,  John,  413. 
Referendum,  305,  306. 
Reformation,  25,  40,  110. 
Regidores,  28. 

Reichsdeputationshauptsckluss,  216. 
Reichsland,  330,  348,  349. 
Reichstag,  330,  331. 
Reign  of  Terror,   60;  effects  of,   60; 

results  of,  61;  end  of,  62. 
"Reinsurance  Treaty,"  359,  363. 
Religious    Beliefs,    affected    by    the 

doctrine  of  evolution,  639. 
Religious  Orders,  in  France,  390. 
Renaissance,  40,  110,  249. 
Renoir,  630. 

Report  of  the  Parliamentary  Com- 
mission, 1842, 174. 
Representation,    Parliamentary,    not 

based  on  population,   151;  in  the 

United  Kingdom,  401. 
Representation    of    the    People    Act, 

1884,  400;  1918,  404. 
Republic,    in    France,    First,    56;   in 

France,  Second,  200-4;  in  Hungary, 


682 


INDEX 


235;  in  some  German  states,  236; 

in   Portugal,    293;   in   Spain,    297; 

in    Switzerland,    304;    in    France, 

Third,   381;  in  Germany,   593;  in 

Russia,  600. 
Republic  of  St.  Mark,  256. 
Rerum  Novarum,  139. 
"Revenge  for  Sadowa,"  320. 
Revolution  of  1830,  in  Prance,  194, 

195. 
Revolution  of  1848,  in  France,  199- 

203;    in    the    Germanics,    225    ft.; 

in   Austria,   225,   226;   in   Prussia, 

226;    in    Italy,    230,    256,    257;   in 

Bohemia,   230;   in   Hungary,    231; 

end  of  in  Central  Europe,  236. 
Revolution  of  1905,  in  Russia,  433-6. 
Revolution  of  1917,  in  Russia,  392; 

causes  of,  600,  601;  first  stages  of, 

601,   602;   Bolshevists   get  control 

in,  602-5;  counter  movements  in, 

605,    606. 
Revolutionary  War,  American,  36. 
Rheims,  570. 

Rheims,  Cathedral  of,  564. 
Rhodes,  Cecil,  478. 
Rhodesia,  478. 
Richelieu,  Due  de,  191. 
Riga,  604. 
Rigsdag,  309. 
Rimski-Korsakov,  627. 
Ris&rgimento,  254,  255,  257. 
Rivet  Law,  381. 
Roads,  612. 

Robespierre,  53,  60,  61. 
Rodin,  629. 
Romagna,  259. 
Roman  Catholic  Religion,  in  France, 

389  390,  391,  392;  in  Great  Britain, 

discriminations    against,     147;    in 

Switzerland,  304. 
Roman   Catholic   Chm-ch,   since  the 

French  Revolution,  640-5. 
Roman  Republic,  256,  260. 
Romania  Irredenta,  467. 
Romanovs,  Dynasty  of,  268. 
Romanticism,  624. 
Romantic  Movement  in  music,  627;  in 

sculpture,  629;  in  painting,  629. 
Rome,  76,  207,  262. 
Romilly,  Sir  Samuel,  162. 
Rontgen,  616. 
Roon,  von,  316. 
Roosevelt,  Theodore,  433. 
Ranke,  von,  625. 
Rousseau,  44,  46,  47,  127,  630. 
Royal  Society  for  the  Prevention  of 

Cruelty  to  Animab,  162. 


Rude,  629. 

Rudolph,  Archduke,  441. 

Rumania,  establishment  of,  207;  ap- 
pendage of  the  Triple  Alliance, 
358;  obtains  independence,  452; 
intervenes  in  the  Second  Balkan 
War,  460,  467;  history  of,  466,  467; 
domestic  affairs  of,  467,  468;  posi- 
tion of  in  1913,  510;  joins  the  Allies, 
558;  conquered,  559;  in  1919-20, 
594. 

Rumanians,  in  the  Dual  Monarchy, 
445;  condition  of  in  Rumania,  468. 

Rumelia,  Eastern,  469. 

Russia,  slavery  in,  3;  serfdom  in,  6; 
in  the  eighteenth  century,  19;  de- 
feated by  Napoleon,  81;  becomes 
unfriendly  to  France,  86;  invaded 
by  Napoleon,  87;  obtains  most  of 
the  Grand  Duchy  of  Warsaw,  97; 
position  of  with  respect  to  industry 
and  war,  123;  assists  Austria  to 
reduce  Himgary,  235;  small  con- 
nection of  with  western  Europe  in 
earlier  times,  265,  266;  beginnings 
of,  266,  267;  great  plain  ot,  267; 
expansion  of,  267-72;  makes  war 
on  Napoleon,  270,  271;  position 
of  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  272; 
under  Alexander  I,  272-5;  serfdom 
in,  272,  273;  condition  of  the  pea- 
sants m,  274,  275;  under  Nicholas 
I,  275-82;  relations  of  with  Turkey, 
280,  281;  defeated  in  the  Crimean 
War,  281;  under  Alexander  II, 
282-9;  abolition  of  serfdom  in, 
282-4;  judicial  system  reformed  in, 
284;  local  government  reformed  in, 
285;  discontent  in,  285,  287;  crushes 
a  Polish  rebellion,  .286;  nihilism  in, 
288;  anarchism  in,  288;  rivalry  of 
with  Austria-Hungary,  353;  expan- 
sion of  at  the  expense  of  Turkey, 
353,  354,  448;  thwarted  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Berlin,  355;  enters  into  a 
new  understanding  with  the  Ger- 
man Empire  and  Austria-Hungary, 
358;  enters  the  "Reinsurance 
Treaty"  with  the  German  Empire, 
359;  in  the  Affair  of  1875,  394; 
relations  of  with  Great  Britain,  416; 
under  Alexander  III,  419-27;  re- 
action in,  420;  repression  in,  420, 
421';  policy  of  Russification  in, 
421,  426;  peoples  of,  421-5;  under 
Nicholas  II,  427-37;  Industrial 
Revolution  in,  428,  429;  foreign 
relations  of,  429,  430;  policy  of  in 


INDEX 


683 


the  Far  East,  430,  431;  defeated 
in  the  Russo-Japanese  War,  431-3; 
terror  and  uprising  in,  433,  434; 
revolution  and  concessions  in,  434, 
435;  reaction  in,  435,  436;  affairs 
of,  1905-1914,  436,  437;  rivalry 
of  with  Austria-Hungary  in  the 
Balkans,  444,  445;  assists  Greece  to 
obtain  independence,  451;  relations 
of  with  Servia,  463;  makes  agree- 
ment with  Great  Britain,  499;  in 
the  Bosnia-Herzegovina  Crisis,  501, 
502;  makes  an  agreement  with 
Germany,  502,  503;  recovers 
strength,  504;  in  the  Balkan  Crisis 
of  1912-13,  509,  510;  geographical 
position  of,  515,  516;  in  the  crisis 
of  1914,  527,  528,  529;  collapse 
of  in  the  Great  War,  562;  revolution 
in,  562,  563;  position  of  in  1919- 
20,  595;  in  the  Great  War,  600; 
fall  of  the  Tsardom  in,  601,  602; 
Revolution  of  1917  in,  601-6;  under 
the  Bolsheviki,  602-6;  the  Greek 
Catholic  Church  in,  640. 

Russian  Church,  268,  269. 

Russian  Plain,  267. 

Russian  Revolution  of  1905,  433-6. 

Russian  Revolution  of  1917,  562,  563, 
601-6;  effects  of  upon  the  Russian 
Church,  640. 

Russians,  defeat  the  Austrians,  549, 
550,  558;  defeated  in  East  Prussia, 
549;  defeated  at  the  Dunajec,  550; 
disastrous  retreat  of,  551;  bravery 
of  in  the  Great  War,  562;  recent 
primacy  of  in  music,  627,  628. 

Russification,  421,  426. 

Russo-Japanese  War,  naval  lessons 
from  372;  causes  of,  430,  431;  course 
of,  431,  432;  end  of,  433;  results  of, 
433. 

Russo-Turkish  War,  354,  452,  466, 
467. 

Ruthenians,  443. 

Saar  Basin,  587. 
Sabotage,  141,  505. 
Sagasta,  297. 
Saint  Beuve,  625. 
St.  Germain,  Treaty  of,  589. 
St.  Helena,  89,  475. 
St.  Mihiel,  571. 
St.  Petersburg,  269. 
St.  Pierre,  Abbe  de,  98. 
St.  Quentin,  557,  568. 
St.  Simon,  133. 
Sakhalin,  433. 


Salisbury,  Marquis  of,  496. 

Salonica,  465,  553. 

Salzburg,  442. 

Samoan  Islands,  485. 

San  Stefano,  Treaty  of,  452. 

Sarajevo,  526. 

Sardinia,  Kingdom  of,  252;  in  the 
Revolution  of  1848,  256;  defeated, 
256;  brings  about  the  unification  of 
Italy,  257-62. 

Savoy,  207,  259. 

Saxony,  238. 

Scandinavia,  16. 

Scandinavian  Countries,  306,  307. 

Scapa  Flow,  592. 

Scharnhorst,  315. 

Scheele,  619. 

Schiller,  624. 

Schleswig,  421. 

Schleswig-Holstein,  244,  308,  317, 
318,  319. 

Schnaebele  Affair,  395. 

Schubert,  626. 

Schiunann,  626. 

Scotland,  serfdom  in,  6;  affected  by 
the  Industrial  Revolution,  122. 

Scott,  Sir  Walter,  624,  625. 

"Scrap  of  Paper,  A"  362,  531. 

Scriabine,  627. 

Sculpture,  since  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, 628,  629. 

Scutari,  459,  510. 

Sea,  Control  of,  by  the  Allies,  in  the 
Great  War,  553-5. 

Sea  Power,  in  the  Great  War,  539,  540. 

Second  Empire,  205  ff . 

Self-government,  in  Switzerland,  305; 
progress  of  in  France,  383,  384;  in 
the  British  Empire,  482. 

September  Laws,  196. 

September  Massacres,  in  Paris,  55. 

Serai,  266. 

Serbo-Bulgarian  War  (1886),  463, 
469. 

Serfdom,  decline  of,  6;  abolished  in 
France,  50;  in  lands  near  France, 
82;  in  Hungary,  232,  233;  in  Prus- 
sia, 237;  in  Russia,  272,  273,  282^. 

Servia,  obtains  autonomy,  450;  makes 
war  on  Turkey,  452,  457;  victories 
of  in  the  First  Balkan  War,  458; 
barred  from  the  Adriatic  Sea  by 
Austria-Hungary,  459;  m  the 
Second  Balkan  War,  460;  history  of, 
462;  relations  of  with  Russia,  and 
with  Austria-Hungary,  463,  464; 
domestic  affairs  in,  464;  in  the  crisis 
about     Bosnia-Herzegovina,     501, 


684 


INDEX 


502;  position  of  in  1913,  510;  im- 
portance of  the  geographical  posi- 
tion of,  523;  attacked  by  Austria, 
526-8;  conquered  by  the  Teutonic 
allies.  551.  552. 

Serzei.  Grand  Duke.  433.  434. 

Sevastopol,  186,  281. 

Seven  Weeks'  War,  243. 

Seven  Years'  War,  17. 

Sewing  Machine,  612. 

Sex  Hygiene,  634. 

Shantung,  486. 

Shaw,  G.  B.,  137. 

Shelley,  625. 

Shells,  Explosive,  621. 

**  Shining  Armor,"  501,  502. 

Shoes,  612. 

Sibelius,  627. 

Siberia,  268. 

"Sick  Man  of  the  East,"  280. 

Sickness  Insurance  Law,  343. 

Siey^,  49. 

Sinn  Fein,  414-16. 

The  Six  Acts,  of  1819,  156. 

Skupshtina,  464. 

Slave  Trade,  in  Russia,  3. 

Slavery,  in  antiquity,  5;  abolished 
in  the  British  colonies,  168;  in  the 
southern  United  States,  168. 

Slavs,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  18; 
contest  of  with  the  Germans,  266; 
in  Greece,  465;  rivalry  of  with  the 
Teutons,  520-3;  position  of  after 
the  Great  War,  596. 

Slivnitsa,  Battle  of,  463,  469. 

Slovaks,  443. 

Smith,  Adam,  127. 

Smuggling,  in  America,  33. 

Sobranje,  470. 

Social  Democratic  Federation,  137. 

Social  Democratic  Party,  136;  growth 
of  in  the  German  Empire,  346;  in 
Russia,  429. 

Social  Revolutionary  Party,  602. 

Socialism,  forerunners  of,  131;  origin 
of  the  term,  132;  beginning  of  in 
France,  133;  carried  forward  by 
Marx,  134;  growth  of  in  the  German 
Empire,  136;  in  Austria-Hungary, 
136;  in  France,  136,  137;  in  Great 
Britain,  137,  138;  in  Russia,  138, 
563,  602,  603,  605;  hostility  to, 
138;  opposed  by  the  Church,  139; 
efiFects  of  upon  religious  beliefs,  642. 

Socialist  Party,  in  France,  137;  in  the 
German  Empire,  344. 

Socialists,  rising  of  in  Paris  1848  and 
1871,    137,    200,    202,    379,    380; 


in  the  German  Empire,  342;  re- 
pression of,  342,  343. 

Soissons,  570. 

Solferino,  Battle  of,  207. 

Somaliland.  French,  484,  Italian,  488. 

Somme,  Battle  of  the,  557,  558. 

Sunderbund,  304,  305. 

South  Africa,  301,  development  of 
British  power  in,  478,  479. 

South  Slavs,  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
20;  relations  of  with  Austria-Hun- 
gary, 444-6;  in  the  Dual  Monarchy, 
445;  interests  of  conflict  with  those 
of  Italy,  582. 

Soviet   Decrees,  600. 

Soviets,  603.  604,  605. 

Spain,  decline  and  decay  of,  15;  power 
of  in  Italy,  16;  colonial  preeminence 
of,  24;  overrun  by  the  French,  84; 
diflSculties  of  the  French  in.  85; 
revolution  in,  103;  earlier  history  of, 
293-5;  partition  of  the  dominions 
of,  295;  in  the  French  Revolution 
and  the  Napoleonic  Wars.  295.  296; 
in  the  nineteenth  century.  296;  re- 
public in,  296;  monarchy  restored 
in,  297;  government  and  progress 
in,  297;  recent  conditions  in,  298; 
loss  of  colonies  by,  488. 

Spanish  America,  attacked  by  raiders, 
24;  government  of,  28,  29;  religion 
in,  29. 

Spanish  Colonies,  win  independence, 
36. 

Spanish  Cultm-e,  in  i^merica,  29,30. 

Spanish  Institutions,  in  America,  28. 

Spanish  Republic,  296.  297. 

Spanish  Restrictions  on  Trade,  in 
America,  33. 

Spanish-American  War,  185,  298. 

Sparticides,  594. 

Spectrum  Analysis,  617,  619. 

Spencer,  Herbert,  on  evolution,  632; 
work  of,  638,  643. 

Spice  Islands  (Moluccas),  292, 301, 489. 

Spicheren,  323. 

Spies,  538. 

Spinning  Jenny,  115. 

"Splendid  Isolation,"  371,  496. 

Stael,  Madame  de,  on  Germany,  212. 

Stambulov,  Stephen,  469. 

Standing  Army,  of  the  German 
Empire,  514;  of  France,  514. 

Stanley,  490. 

State  Socialism  138,  139;  in  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  343,  344. 

States  of  the  Church,  gee  Papal 
States. 


INDEX 


685 


States  General,  in  France,  48,  49 

States  General  of  Holland,  301. 

Steam  Engine,  116,  117,  612. 

Steamboat,  117. 

Steamships,  613. 

Stein,  vom,  217,  315. 

Stendhal,  625. 

Stephenson,  George,  117,  612. 

Stevenson,  R.  L.,  625. 

Stolypin,  436. 

SUrrthing,  307. 

Straits  Settlements,  476. 

Strassburg,  325. 

Strategic  Railways,  515. 

Strikes,  141;  in  Great  Britain,  407. 

Styria,  442. 

Submarine  Cable,  615. 

Submarine  warfare,  unrestricted, 
560,  561. 

Submarines,  in  the  Great  War,  559- 
61,  563,  564,  567,  568;  methods 
employed  against,  567;  invention  of, 
621. 

Sudermann,  625. 

Sudan,  397,  478. 

Suez  Canal,  366,  477. 

SuflFragettes,  403. 

Sumatra,  489. 

Surgery,  622. 

Sweden,  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
16;  at  war  with  Russia,  82;  obtains 
Norway,  95;  government  and  pro- 
gress in,  in  the  nineteenth  centm-y, 
307;  culture  of  in  Finland,  424. 

Swinburne,  625. 

Switzerland,  earlier  history  of,  304; 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  304,  305; 
self-government  in,  305,  306. 

Syllabus  of  Errors,  139,  632,  644. 

Syndicalism,  140,  141. 

Syndicalists,  141,  142. 

Sz6chenyi,  Count,  232. 

Taff  Vale  Case,  406. 

faille,  44. 

Taine,  on  Napoleon,  90. 

Talleyrand,  94,  97. 

"Tanks,"  572. 

Tannenberg,  Battle  of,  549. 

Tartars,  266. 

Taxes,  in  France,  in  the  eighteenth 

century,  43,  44. 
Tchataldja  Lines,  458. 
Telegraph,  615. 
Telephone,  615. 
Tennyson,  625. 
"Terrible  Year,"  377. 
Terror,  in  France,  60,  61. 


Terrorism,  in  Russia,  289. 

Test  Act,  148. 

Teutons,  rivalry  of  with  the  Slavs, 

520-3;  alleged  racial  superiority  of, 

523,  524. 
Textile  Industry,  inventions  in,  114, 

115. 
Thackeray,  625. 
Thibet,  481. 
Thiers,  196,  380. 
Third  Estate,  49. 
Third  Republic,  French,  proclaimed, 

379,    381;    established,    381,    382; 

government     of,     381-5;     France 

under,  385-98. 
Third  Section  of  the  Tsar's  Private 

Chancellery,  276. 
Thirteen  Colonies,  loss  of,  476. 
Thirty  Years'  War,  17. 
Thompson,  Benjamin,  618. 
Thorwaldsen,  628. 
"The  Thousand,"  260. 
Three-class    System    of    Voting,    in 

Prussia,  331,  332. 
Tilsit,  Treaty  of,  81. 
Tocqueville,  de,  on  the  character  of  the 

French  people,  188. 
Toynbee,  Arnold,  on  the  Industrial 

Revolution,  109. 
Tu-pitz,  Admiral  von,  370. 
Todleben,  281. 
Togo,  Adnural,  432. 
Togoland,  486. 
Tolstoy,  625. 
Tonkin,  484. 
Torture,  45,  152,  647. 
Toulon,  60. 
Town  Government,  in  Great  Britain, 

170;  reform  of,  171. 
Town    Workers,    in    France    in    the 

eighteenth  century,  43. 
Trade  Routes,  in  Central  Europe,  237. 
Trade  Unions,  forerunners  of  in  Eng- 
land,   129,    130;    forbidden,    131; 

legalized,  131,  406;  relations  of  with 

syndicalism,  141. 
Trades  Disputes  Act,  406. 
Trafalgar,  80,  81,  371. 
Transportation,     great    changes    in, 

612-14. 
Trans-Siberian  Railway,  430. 
Transylvania,  442,  448,  466. 
Travel,  612-14. 
Treaties,  Sanctity  of,  503. 
Treitschke,     on     universal     military 

service,  313;  on  the  German  nation, 

329. 
Trentino,  261,  572. 


686 


INDEX 


Trevithick,  Richard,  117,  612. 

Trieste,  261,  442,  572. 

Trinidad.  476. 

Triple  Alliance,  S56,  357;  end  of, 
857;  effects  of,  358;  relations  of 
with  Great  Britain,  364;  weakening 
of,  504. 

Triple  Alliance  of  Workers,  in  Great 
Britain,  408. 

Triple  Entente,  417,  499;  increasing 
strength  of,  503,  504. 

Tripoli,  455,  488. 

Tristan  und  Isolde,  627. 

Troppau,  Congress  of,  102;  Protocol 
of,  103. 

Trotzky,  60;  on  the  government  of 
Russia,  436;  in  the  Russian  Revolu- 
tion, 604,  605. 

Tsar,  title  of  assumed,  267. 

Tsardom,  fall  of  in  Russia,  602. 

Tschaikovsky,  627. 

Tsingtao,  554. 

Tsushima,  Battle  of,  432. 

Tunisia,  357,  484. 

Turco-Italian  War,  455,  517. 

Turgeniev,  288,  625. 

Turgot,  48,  127. 

Turkey,  relations  of  with  Russia,  280, 
281;  zenith  of  the  power  of,  354; 
an  appendage  of  the  Triple  Alliance, 
358;  relations  of  with  the  German 
Empire,  365;  greatness  of,  446, 
447;  decline  of,  447,  448;  govern- 
ment in,  447,  448;  dismemberment 
of,  449;  defeated  by  Russia,  452; 
continued  decline  of,  455;  revolu- 
tion in,  457;  defeated  in  the  First 
Balkan  War,  457-9;  lowly  position 
of,  460;  position  of  in  1913,  510; 
surrenders  to  the  Allies,  572;  ques- 
tion of,'  584;  losses  of  in  the  Great 
War,  590,  591. 

Turner,  630. 

Tuscany,  251,  259. 

"Two-Power  Standard,"  369. 

Two  Sicilies,  Kingdom  of  the,  252, 
260. 

Uganda,  478. 

Ukraine,  268,  365,  422. 

Ulm,  80. 

Ulster,  181,  414,  415. 

Ultima  Thule,  474. 

Ultimatum    of    Austria-Hungary    to 

Servia,  513. 
Union  of  South  Africa,  482. 
United    Provinces,    see    Netherlands, 

Dutch. 


United  States,  independence  of,  36; 
recognizes  the  Third  French  Re- 
public, 381;  population  assimilated 
in,  425;  joins  the  Allies,  564,  566; 
reasons  for  joining  them  564-6; 
prepares  for  the  conflict,  566,  567; 
refuses  to  join  the  League  of  Na- 
tions, 592;  position  of  in  1919-20, 
596.  I 

Unity,  German,  lack  of  in  the  Holy       I 
Roman  Empire,  212-16;  forwarded        ^ 
by    Napoleon,    216;    attempt    to 
achieve  in  1848,  226. 

University  Tests  Act,  405. 

Universal  Military  Service,  origin  of 
315;  developed  by  Prussia,  315-17; 
great  results  from,  317  ff.;  adopted 
in  France,  394. 

Universe,  changed  ideas  concerning, 
617,  618;  ideas  concerning,  635,  636, 
637. 

University  of  France,  76. 

Usher,  Archbishop,  636. 

Utrecht,  Treaty  of,  295. 

Valmy,  Battle  of,  56. 

"Vatican,  Prisoners  of  the,"  262. 

Vatican  Council,  340. 

La  Vendee,  59. 

VendSmiaire,  Thirteenth,  63. 

Venetia,  85,  243,  251,  261. 

Venice,  9,  11,  69,  76,  256. 

Venizelos,  457,  465. 

Verdun,  543,  556,  557. 

Verdi,  626,  627. 

Verona,  Congress  of,  104. 

Versailles,  Treaty  of,  585-8,  592.   ' 

Viceroyalties,  in  Spanish  America,  29. 

Victoria,  Queen,  159,  171,  364,  496. 

Vienna,   occupied  by  Napoleon,   80, 

85;     Constituent     Diet     in,     234; 

captured,    234;    besieged    by    the 

Turks,  447;  sad  conditions  in,  590. 
Vienna,  Treaty  of,  1809,  85;  1864,  318. 
Villafranca,  Truce  of,  207,  259. 
Village,  life  in,  4,  5,  6. 
Village  Church,  5. 
Villele,  192,  193. 
Vilna,  551. 
Vimy,  561. 
Virginia,  25,  475. 

Virginia  Company  of  London,  473. 
Volta,  619. 
Voltaire,  45,  46;  on  the  Holy  Roman 

Empire,  215;  attitude  of,  390, 

Wagner,  Richard,  627. 
Wagram,  Battle  of,  85 


INDEX 


687 


WaldseemuUer,  Martin,  23. 

Wallace,  A.  R.,  on  the  nineteenth 
century,  608;  work  of,  638. 

Walpole,  Horace,  15. 

War,  Art  of,  in  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries,  70;  French- 
men leaders  in  70,  71 ;  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  620,  621;  on  the 
sea,  621. 

War,  desire  to  abolish,  98,  648;  rela- 
tion of  to  industrial  resovu*ces,  123; 
material  for  at  the  beginning  of  the 
twentieth  century,  514,  515;  glori- 
fication of  among  the  Germans, 
524. 

War  of  1812,  184. 

War  of  Liberation,  315. 

War  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  295. 

Warsaw,  81,  278,  551. 

Waterloo,  Battle  of,  89. 

Water  Supply,  609,  610. 

Watt,  James,116,  612. 

Wei-hai-wei,  480. 

Weimar,  18. 

Wellesley,  Sir  Arthur,  84,  292.  See 
Wellington,  Duke  of. 

Wellington,  Duke  of,  165. 

Weltmackt  oder  Untergang,  525. 

West  Indies,  79. 

Westphalia,  Treaty-of,  299. 

West  Prussia,  349,  587. 

Whistler,  630. 

White  Russians,  422. 

Whitney,  Eli,  115. 

"Wild  Women,"  403. 

William  I,  King  of  Holland,  300. 

William  I,  King  of  Prussia,  German 
Emperor,  character  of,  241,  322, 
333;  attempt  to  assassinate,  342. 

William  II,  German  Emperor,  333, 
334;  policy  of,  363,  364;  visits  of  to 
Constantinople,  364,  365;  on  Ger- 
man sea  power,  370;  goes  to  Mo- 
rocco, 497;  gains  ascendancy  over 
Nicholas  II,  497;  on  the  impotence 
of  France,  507;  m  the  crisis  of  1914, 
529;  flees  from  Germany,  593. 

William  IV,  King  of  England,  159. 

Wilson,  Woodrow,  on  democracy, 
576;  character  and  high  position 
of,  577;  the  "Fourteen  Points"  of, 
577,  578;  at  the  Congress  of  Paris, 
580,  584. 

Windischgratz,  Prince,  233,  234,  235 

Wireless  Telegraphy,  615. 


Witte,  de,  428,  434. 

Wollaston,  619. 

Woman's  SufiFrage,  in  Norway,  308; 
in  New  Jersey,  401;  in  Great  Bri- 
tain, 401-4;  in  the  twentieth 
century,  634,  635. 

Women,  position  of  in  the  old  regime. 
7,  633;  position  of  bettered  by  the 
Industrial  Revolution,  143,  144; 
position  of  in  Great  Britain,  153, 
154;  changing  position  of  in  Great 
Britain,  402;  position  of  bettered, 
634;  political  equality  obtained 
by,  634,  635. 

Women's  Movement,  401. 

Wordsworth,  624. 

Workers,  condition  of  affected  by  the 
Industrial  Revolution,  125,  128, 
129,  130;  degeneration  among,  129; 
forbidden  to  combine,  129;  condi- 
tion of  improves,  130;  Marx  on  the 
history  of,  134;  condition  of  in  the 
German  Empire,  344. 

Workingmen's  Compensation  Act, 
406. 

"World  Dominion  or  Downfall," 
362. 

World  War,  (1918),  aftermath  of,  93. 
See  Great  War. 

Worship  of  Reason,  641. 

Worth,  323. 

Wurtemberg,  244. 

X-Rays,  616. 

Year  I,  56. 

Young,  Arthur,  44;  on  birth  rate  in 

France,  392. 
Young  Ireland,  413. 
Young  Italy,  255. 
Young,  Thomas,  619. 
Young  Turks,  457,  500. 
Ypres,  First  Battle  of,  548;  Second 

Battle  of,  556. 
Ypsilanti,  Prince,  450. 
Yser,  Battle  of  the,  548. 
Yudenitch,  General,  606. 

Zabern,  347. 

Zanzibar,  478. 

Zeppelins,  565. 

Zemstvo,  285,  420. 

Zola,  625. 

Zolherein,  238,  240,  335. 

Zurich,  Treaty  of,  207,  259. 


THE  COUNTRY  LIFE  PRESS 
GARDEN  CITY,  N.  Y, 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 

AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.00  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


MAY    9    1946 


MAY  QQ    1 


JUN 


ym 


12!MnM0'irg 


■•■  t^ijS 


Jt: P 1  7  1952  Ll> 


\      7Jun54jP  ' 


jj^6    *  lao-"-^' 


JOi 


•>w 


f^'^CD  LD 


iJa4* 


mt 


60ct'b9lVW 


I^EC'D  CD 


•ua^aeq 


^5May'6lL0 


}^;  .--n  ID 


t}I.JN    2  19b1 


^j^ 


pffNr 


m 


^aoA-7P>ft 


MAYS- 1956  l-U 


LD  21-100m-12,'43(379as) 


^H 

mm 


m\ 


mmm 


